Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Friday, November 25, 2022, 18:21 (727 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: There are all sorts of evolutions: human inventions have failed forms that are discarded; failed concepts in philosophy; failed political parties; etc. All dead ends.

dhw: So now you are telling us that your God, who knew exactly how to design what he wanted, designed life forms that failed to come up with the life forms he wanted to design. Your God kept failing, exactly like us humans! And you think I'm the one who " humanizes" your God!

I bring up human examples of dead ends to try and empty your head of worry about dead ends in any form of evolution, and back you bounce to worry about God's form of evolution. All dead ends are of equal importance as examples of how any form evolution works!

DAVID: As for your failed mantra that God makes no sense to me, it is an empty space filler of a contorted accusation. My view of my God makes perfect sense to me.

dhw: Please stop manufacturing straw men. I have never said that God makes no sense to you! It is your theory concerning his purpose and actions that you admit you cannot explain – it "makes sense only to God”.

And in that concept, it makes perfect sense to me. Something that evades your understanding.

DAVID: You totally ignore the point I start with. God, the creator, created everything He thought necessary. Which then leads to accepting everything in God's evolutionary process was required.

dhw: You agree that the dead ends were not necessary for our line plus food. But now you believe your God thought designing dead-end failures was necessary for him to succeed.

Again, your failure to comprehend. Whatever has appeared God considered was required

DAVID: Totally illogical. Only a Darwinian wants tiny step-by-step evolution!!! Gould pointed out small gaps everywhere. The Cambrian gap was recognized by Darwin, who hoped it would be filled about 170 years ago. Still there, in spades, with all the new discoveries in China.

dhw: Of course there are gaps. You can’t expect to find fossils of every single link in every single line for the last 3.8 billion years! But as usual, you have simply ignored the contradiction between your two sets of theories! If you believe there is a continuous line of descent from Archaea to us plus food, it makes no sense to state that we plus food are descended from life forms that had no predecessors!

A designer can create any gaps He wishes in phenotypes, but not in the biochemistry of living. Only advances in biochemistry permit advances in phenotypes. True evolutionary continuity is in advancing biochemistry, never phenotype.

New Edicarean fossils; new ones with meal

DAVID: we knew they had to eat and are early animals but not anywhere near as complex as Cambrian's.

dhw: That’s evolution for you – later animals build on the foundations laid by their ancestors. More support for the continuity of speciation, as opposed to speciation without predecessors.

DAVID: The Cambrian is exactly what you decry! Darwinian evolution of tiny phenotypic steps is dead! (dhw: David’s Cambrian theory is that God designed our ancestors plus foods from scratch, without any predecessors.)

And under “A new fungal family”:

DAVID: Where did our Archaean genes come from? CONTINUITY! "Darwinian evolution of tiny phenotypic steps is dead!"

dhw: Forget Darwin. Do you or do you not believe that we and our food evolved in a continuous line from Archaea? Or do you believe that we and our food descended from Cambrian life forms which your God designed from scratch without any predecessors?

From Archaea!!! Which provided the biochemistry for later forms to join in multicellularity. The bold is again Darwinian phenotypical interpretation of evolution