Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, January 24, 2023, 08:09 (456 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I'll accept God 'created' evolution as His system to eventually produce humans. It is a system with dead ends. It is also the true history we have. Considering God as all-powerful, He had reasons we do not understand. Best way, only way? Doesn't matter. God's powers of design solved all problems for survival. Opposite view to yours.

Please stop waffling away from your theory. The “true history” is that we and our food are here after vast numbers of life forms have come and gone. Your theory is that your all-powerful God designed them all, in accordance with conditions he did not control, solely in order to create us and our food, but 99% were “mistakes” and “failed experiments”. This interpretation of evolution is not based on God’s reasons which we do not understand, but on parts of your theory which are illogical and indefensible unless your aim is to prove your designer God’s bumbling incompetence.

dhw: [...]In two of my alternatives, a) his experiments are successful and he continues to develop them in his quest to create a being like himself (plus food), or (b) he gets new ideas as he goes along. No failures, no bumbling. You dismiss them because you say they humanise him. […] Why is it less “human” to achieve a goal despite lack of control of conditions, and despite countless mess-ups, mistakes and failed experiments, than it is to achieve a goal without making any mistakes or conducting any failed experiments […]

DAVID: The red bold makes no sense because it skips over the true history of evolution. My non-human God is exactly opposite your human God who suddenly changes course with 'new ideas'. Please discuss a God who fits history.

Experiments that improve the original invention are not failures, and new ideas can grow out of preceding ideas, e.g. legs can be transformed into flippers or arms – precisely as happens in evolution. That is not “failure”. If your version of your God’s evolution was not restricted to a single purpose and “course” (us and our food), then his experiments would not have to be classed as failures!

DAVID: Now we have your non-purposeful God, just drifting along having fun with no purpose, just creating whatever idea comes along!!!! What God of what religion is that?

Theory 1 = experimenting with the purpose of creating a being like himself (plus food). Theory 2 has the purpose of “enjoyment” of creating and “interest” (two human patterns of thought you have suggested yourself) in finding out the potential of a remarkable invention. Theory 3 is the same, but the purpose (and interest) lies in finding out what the remarkable invention can achieve by itself. What religion depicts God as an experimenter with a 99% failure rate, who depends on luck to fulfil his only purpose?

DAVID: Having new ideas as He goes along is a great description of bumbling!

dhw: you have no understanding of the creative process. Many artists, composers, writers begin simply with one idea and it is part of the fascinating process to see what this will lead to. (I speak from experience.) Even in your own theory, you have your eternal God suddenly creating this universe and life. Wasn’t that in itself a new idea?[…] Now please answer my bolded question.

DAVID: Answered above. Before the BB God was planning on humans. You don't understand my concept of God.

No, I don’t. Are you now telling me that planning humans was all he had been thinking about for the whole of eternity before the BB? So what made him suddenly think of the BB? Was that the new idea? This whole argument is becoming farcical. A God who has new ideas is apparently a human bungler, but a God whose work has a 99% failure rate is divinely all-powerful.

DAVID: In so doing God created a huge bush of life a our food supply.

dhw: But 99% of the “bushes” he created had no connection with our food supply, and you call them mistakes/failed experiments.

DAVID: In evolution the past 99% becomes the present food supply.

The past 99% were the dead ends that did NOT lead to us and our food supply. This is the most egregious of all your U-turns! You have argued all along that “true evolution has a 99% failure rate”!

DAVID: God did exactly what He wanted to do, using the method He wanted to use, all decided before He made the universe.

dhw: GOD: “I only wanna create David Turell and his breakfast, so I’m gonna deliberately create millions of useless critters that ain’t got nothin’ to do with him an’ his breakfast, so he can tell the world that all my mistakes an’ failed experiments prove how clever I was ter create him an’ his breakfast.”

DAVID: Ignored. The past 99% plus the survivors resulted in me and my food. Evolution is a continuous invented process of increasing complexity. Without the 99%, I would still be an amoeba.

You have turned your "99% failure rate" into a 99% success rate. It’s without the 1% that you would still be an amoeba with nothing but bacteria and nematodes for your breakfast.