Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Monday, January 30, 2023, 18:18 (661 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: You totally dismiss the concept that God does whatever He wants and can design to fit exactly how He wishes to proceed, in this issue, to a final human species. History shows that happened despite your confusion in how to think about it. Just look at extremophiles to make the point. Life is everywhere in every set of conditions.

dhw: All my theories are based fairly and squarely on your God doing what he wants. I therefore assume that whether he designed them or not, he wanted the 99% of species that had no connection with us and our food – in contrast to you, who insist that they were all mistakes/failed experiments. Why have you left that out? I also assume that if he is all-powerful, he will not have to rely on chance to produce the conditions suitable for what you believe to have been his one and only purpose (us and our food). Why have you also left that out? Extremophiles do not make the point that his one and only purpose was to design us and our food. Do you count them as being among the 99% of failed experiments or as part of the 1% that led to us and our food? They certainly fit in with any of my three alternative theories, which entail no mistakes/failed experiments but have him creating precisely what he wanted to create.

We know that over 99% of all previous species are gone. They failed to survive, so evolution produces failed species. God designed evolution and therefore produced failures as part and parcel of the system. The failures allow progression to surviving forms that are improvements over the past. You miss my extremophile point which is God can design for any set of extreme circumstances, and therefore doesn't need to control conditions. The bolded point above doesn't recognize, if God created our known evolutionary history, He created the 99+% failure rate, to repeat my point.

dhw: This is not quite correct. I have no problem with evolution as a way to create humans and our food. The problem that I had “years ago” was your insistence that he designed every individual life form, lifestyle,...and that your theory made sense only to God. One of my alternatives was experimentation, which initially you rejected and have now embraced, but with a new interpretation: you tell us that the 99% were mistakes or failed experiments and your God was “responsible” for what you call the “mess”. In my view, mistakes and failed experiments do not fit in with the concept of an all-powerful God, and I don’t see why you should regard him as being so incompetent when there are other explanations which have him doing precisely what he wanted to do.

Did God produce our known evolutionary history is the point. I claim He did,

DAVID: Again you bring us a weak God without purpose to create humans, as the driving force.
And:
DAVID: As you describe my theory, by emphasizing the failed dead ends, how did God manage to achieve our appearance on the scene?

dhw: If his initial purpose was to create a being like himself, he could have done so by continuously experimenting with different life forms which were successful in themselves (they lived and survived for long periods) but which he felt he could improve on. Alternatively, he could have started out on a voyage of discovery, getting new ideas as he went along, and humans were the latest of his ideas. Or he could have invented a mechanism (cellular intelligence) leading to a free-for-all, in which case either humans evolved naturally from cell communities constantly creating new forms as conditions changed, or (as I always specify) your God could have dabbled if he wished to. No weakness, no mistakes, no failures.

Back to humanizing a God who has no preconceived goals.

DAVID: Again, you bring up 'luck'. No luck required. I'll repeat: God can design organisms for any set of conditions, because He is all-powerful.

dhw: You can repeat it as often as you like, and I will repeat that if he wants to design humans but you say he does not control the conditions necessary for humans to survive, he depends on luck to provide those conditions. The theory that he can and does design species which survive under the conditions at any given time is what leads him to designing what you call his 99% of mistakes and failures, since they have nothing to do with us and our food.

Extremophiles show He can produce for any condition. Yes? No luck needed.

DAVID: Back to the issue of why use evolution as the method of creation? That is what God did. He had success with it. Our brain, the most complex mechanism in the universe. The possible answers: a choice among methods, the only method that works. Take your choice. God chose His way for His unknown reasons.

dhw: All my alternatives have him using evolution successfully (including the evolution of our brain). Only yours has him using it with 99% failures, which once again you have left out of your comment! Your last sentence should read: David Turell insists that God chose his (David’s) interpretation of evolution, and David chose this interpretation but cannot find a single reason to justify it.

If you can accept the point that God is in charge and God produced our evolutionary history, God then produced a 99+% failure rate. And successfully produced us wiih our giant complex brain.