Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by dhw, Thursday, February 23, 2023, 10:41 (422 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: I've used those terms in the past to open up an answer your question as to why God evolved us. Yes, itis messy. Please accept my current statement without referring to past complete discussions.

dhw: What do you mean? I am referring to the theory you are currently promoting and defending. Or do you now wish to withdraw your theory that your God’s good design included deliberately designing 99% of mistakes, failed experiments, wrong choices etc. in his messy attempt to design us and our food? If you now think this is a load of nonsense, then please say so, and we can draw a line under it.

DAVID: The load of nonsense is your tortured view of my attempt to discuss God's choice of creation. It is indirect and takes lots of time. Logically a strange choice using human reasoning. You have asked me to tell you why God chose that method. I replied at the same level of silliness, ask God. Conclusion, God does as He wants, but we can try to analyze what He has done for a purpose or purposes.

If God exists, there is very little in your response that I would disagree with. You have simply ignored the fact that you have described your God’s method as inefficient, full of mistakes, failed experiments, wrong choices, faulty designs etc., and you have asked me not to refer to these terms. What level of “silliness” are you thinking of? You have proposed a theory that makes your God into an inefficient blunderer, and told me to ask him why he chose to be an inefficient blunderer, thereby admitting that you can find no justification for your theory. And then you ask me not to use the derogatory terms you have used to describe your vision of him.

DAVID:"God purposely designs limited adaptation abilities, short of requiring a new species. That is His job. No failure, good design".

dhw: “Limited adaptation abilities” are the faults in his design that led to the extinction of the 99% of life forms which were dead ends that did not lead to what you believe to have been his only purpose: us and our food.

DAVID: God did not design anyone for living into perpetuity. It is not a fault in His designed evolution. It is a necessary attribute.

We are not talking about the death of individuals, but about the extinction of species. The faulty design you criticize him for is that which results in 99% of life forms being specially created although they have no connection with what you say is your God’s only purpose: us and our food. When will you stop dodging?

DAVID: God designed the great bush of life to be under our control and provide our food.

dhw: The great bush of life grew and changed for 3.X billion years before we came on the scene, and you have told us that 99% of its twigs and branches were mistakes and failures. Only 1% survived to evolve into us and the bush that provides our food. […]

DAVID: By God's cumbersome method, yes.

The cumbersome method being his design of 99% mistakes, failed experiments etc., which your cumbersome, inefficient God personally designed, knowing that they were going to be mistakes, and you haven’t a clue why he would choose such a daft method, so I should ask him why. Thank you for agreeing.

DAVID: Failure to survive allows God to evolve the 1% that became what exists today as a set of huge and small ecosystems, most of which supplies our food.

dhw: Now what are you saying? That your God could not have designed the 1% of survivors if he hadn’t designed the 99% per cent that didn’t survive? To use your own analogy, in order to design your house, did you have to build and then knock down 99 other houses that you knew you didn’t want to build?

DAVID: Weird misunderstanding of evolution. To step into your silly analogy, my house can evolve into another house only by adding on some new structure. Every new form evolves directly from a past form, except when God creates gap.

It was your own analogy, but this is an excellent variation if one accepts the existence of your God. Much better than mine. Thank you. You now have him building a house, and adding new structures, 99% of which fall down because they are all wrong for the house he wants to build. Some designer!