More "miscellany" PARTS ONE & TWO (General)

by dhw, Sunday, March 19, 2023, 12:40 (375 days ago) @ David Turell

Neutrinos still confusing

dhw: […] you are the one with a problem, because you have a theory that you are desperate to prove: God had to create trillions of stars and solar systems in order to design us and our food.

DAVID: My desperate approach is simplicity itself: the size is required.

dhw: Just as the 99% of speciation blunders are “required”, and you don’t know why, and we should ask God because you haven’t got a clue why we should believe your theory.

DAVID: My first clue is your full disbelief in God.

dhw: There you go again. I am an agnostic, and all the alternative theories I have proposed allow for your God’s existence.

DAVID: All of your objections to God might be swept aside to "allow" God to sneak in.

Please stop pretending that my agnosticism justifies your illogical theistic theories and invalidates my alternative theistic theories.

Giraffe plumbing

dhw: Please tell us why you think your God would have designed the long necks of the extinct Mamenchisaurus and the giraffe.

DAVID: The giraffe is part of a cud-chewing ecosystem. God doesn't create anything not required. In dinosaurs weird possibilities popped up. God knows why that happened.

dhw: Not required for what? 99% of his creations were not required for what you claim was his one and only purpose. And you clearly have no idea why he created the long necks or the weird dinosaurs. Only God can explain your nonsense.

DAVID: Exactly!! God knows what He is doing for His own purposes. Easily accepted by believers.

If God exists, that is easily accepted by anyone. What is not easily accepted is your theory that he designed long necked dinosaurs in order to design you and your food, though they had nothing to do with you and your food. There are other theistic theories that make far more sense.

Air-filled bones

QUOTE: "The study found no common ancestor had this trait. All three groups must have developed air sacs independently, and each time in slightly different ways. (DAVID’s bold)

DAVID: note my bold, no precursors!!! This gives us another design gap along with the Cambrian, etc.

I have no objection to the argument that gaps could be used as evidence for your God’s existence, just as they can be used as evidence for the innovative intelligence of cells (possibly designed by your God). I’m an agnostic. What I object to so vehemently is your illogical theory discussed, and now I hope finally abandoned, on the other thread.

Dissing Darwin

QUOTES: “We conclude that macroevolution via survival of the fittest is not salvageable by arguments for random genetic drift and other proposed mechanisms.” (David’s bold)

Thus, survival of the fittest is illogical when proposed as adequate for selecting the origination of all complex, major, new body-types and metabolic functions because the multiple changes in multiple genomes that are required have intermediate stages without advantage; selection would not reasonably occur, and disadvantage or death would logically prevail.” (dhw’s bold)

The authors seem to be making two separate theories out of one. What does “selecting the origination” mean? Darwin’s theory is that random mutations cause the changes to existing bodies, and natural selection ensures that only beneficial mutations survive. We agree that random mutations cannot explain the complexities, but that has nothing to do with natural selection, which does not originate anything. What intermediate stages are the authors referring to? How do they know that e.g. whale and hominin “stages” were not advantageous? And why is it illogical to assume that every innovation that survived did so because it was advantageous? The problem is the source of the innovations, and our rejection of Darwin’s random mutations leaves open the alternatives of your God designing every mutation, and intelligent design by the cells and bacteria of which bodies consist (their intelligence having possibly been designed by your God).

DAVID: Every de novo phenotypical or biochemical appearance is a gap. No itty-bitty Darwinoid steps. My bolds emphasize these points. With designed gaps, a designer must exist.

Have you finally ditched the concept of common descent? You seem to waver between your God using the 1% of survivors to continue his experiments on his merry way to designing us (plus food), and creation of every species de novo.

Before the Big Bang

QUOTE: There really was a Universe before the hot Big Bang, and some very strong evidence from the 21st century truly proves that it’s so.

DAVID: We still have the appearance of " something from nothing". The beginning is changed to inflation first, then the Bang

Earlier: DAVID: I certainly agree what happened before the Big Bang is call foolish guesswork.

Exit Guth at last.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum