Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Sunday, November 06, 2022, 11:22 (746 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: You agree to what. You say, 'I agree' and run right back to your illogical dissection of evolution, as unrelated dead ends. Where did our enormous ecosystem providing our food supply come from?

dhw: It evolved from those branches of evolution which were NOT dead ends. According to you, those were all life forms that sprang from nowhere during the Cambrian, although many of those life forms (e.g. the dinosaurs) were also dead ends. My totally conventional proposal is that all life forms and their ecosystems, including ours and all the dead ends, evolved from Darwin’s original few forms or one.

DAVID: Exactly. Evolution produces dead ends.

You keep hiding behind “evolution” producing this, that and the other (nicely in keeping with my free-for-all alternative), and forgetting that according to your theory it is your God who specially designed all the dead ends, and he designed them all as absolute requirements for us and our food, although by definition none of them led to us and our food!

dhw: You cannot claim that there is a continuous line from the first life forms to us and our ecosystems and at the same time claim that we and our ecosystems are descended from a line of life forms and ecosystems that had no predecessors!

DAVID: Living forms run on biologic systems. The Ediacaran biologic systems are the basis for the phenotypic Cambrian changes in form, but not living biology which is continuous.

I don’t understand the second sentence. If Ediacaran “biological systems” provided the basis for new species, then we have continuity. Evolution’s history is that of living forms and biological systems changing into new forms and systems, so why do you say “not living biology"? What you have described IS living biology, and upholds the conventional view of evolution.

DAVID: The Cambrian is based upon the Ediacaran. That is evolution!!!!

Exactly! So why do you keep telling us that your God designed the 37 phyla from which we and our food (plus lots more dead ends) have descended, and they had no predecessors? Without predecessors you cannot have continuity!

DAVID: Your illogical argument comes from your lack of recognizing these two aspects of changing life forms in evolution.

Your illogical argument comes from your “lack of recognizing” that your desperate desire for discontinuity – in order to prove your God’s existence by having him design WITHOUT PREDECESSORS the phyla from which we and our food are descended - directly contradicts your belief that we were your God’s sole purpose from the start, which would require our continuous descent from archaea. And so in one breath you have continuous but discontinuous evolution, and descent from archaea but descent only from Cambrian phyla. And none of this even remotely begins to explain why your God deliberately designed the countless life forms that had no connection with the only life forms he wanted to design.

DAVID: Your same confusion!! Read my comments above.

They are as confused and confusing as ever.