Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Saturday, November 26, 2022, 16:42 (517 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: 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!

dhw: So your God specially designed countless forms of life that had no connection with those that he wanted to design, because dead ends are important to show that evolution works by repeatedly failing to design what you want to design. I hope your all-powerful God knows what you are talking about.

More tortured twists invented about evolution. In our case, simple became complex and many simple organisms disappeared. But many remain to form the ecosystems that feed us. A perfect example is dinosaurs becoming our birds. God knew how to evolve us. You don't understand my God.

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.

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

dhw: And according to you, dead ends that had no connection with his purpose were “required”, because that is how human forms of evolution work.

All forms of evolution may have dead ends while working from start to end. I used human to help you see teh need for dead ends. Direct creation solves the dead-end problem, as you have noted

dhw: (referring to the Cambrian): 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!

DAVID: 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.

dhw: ALL phenotypes evolve into different phenotypes through changes in the biochemistry.
You seem to be saying that speciation is irrelevant to the concept of common descent.

No, the level of developed biochemistry of life permits the design of a new more advanced species from old. Still speciation. Allows for gaps in forms from a continuous process, the complexification of living biochemistry.

dhw: 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?

DAVID: From Archaea!!! Which provided the biochemistry for later forms to join in multicellularity.

dhw: So your God's apparent creation of the new Cambrian phenotypes (without predecessors) from which we are descended does not denote a break in evolutionary continuity, because "true" continuity is only defined by the fact that all evolutionary developments involve biochemical changes. And there was me thinking that the basis of evolution was the development of all living forms from earlier ancestral forms.

Sorry for your incomplete thinking. There are two levels to study. The inner biochemicals and the outer forms. Our neurons work like mouse neurons, but the underlying functions are used in humans to create more advanced neurons which function at a more complex way.