More "miscellany" PARTS ONE & TWO (General)

by David Turell @, Sunday, March 26, 2023, 17:26 (369 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Of course, He wanted to design all of evolution's organisms, most of which became our food.

dhw: 99% did not become our food. 99% were dead ends that provided food for past life, which “plays no role in current life”.

DAVID: Again evolution is sliced into disparate unrelated parts. Foolishness for an argument.

dhw: I have quoted you! If extinct past species play no role in current life, then of course they are not related to our “part” of evolution! The continuum is provided by the 1% of survivors, not the 99% of dead ends!

Another example of distortion. My quote simply says the past is in the past!!! Of course there is a continuum. Thanks for finally accepting it. The 99.9% is the required screening evolution produces. It is a natural part of the process you keep dissecting.>


DAVID: What form of evolution are you referring to? certainly not ours.

dhw: Please clarify. Do you still believe that your God individually designed every extinct species, and every extinct species was “an absolute requirement” for him to be able to design us and our food?

DAVID: Yes

dhw: So if he hadn’t designed the brontosaurus (plus the other 99% of pre- and post-Cambrian non-survivors, not to mention all the extinct lifestyles and strategies and natural wonders), neither we nor our food could have existed, even though he was perfectly capable of designing species without predecessors (Cambrian). And even if we forget your theory of a few weeks ago that the 99% were mistakes and failed experiments, why do you still consider his method to have been messy, inefficient and cumbersome?

Where is your theory He should have directly created us? That He didn't is your problem. I accept that God invented a slow cumbersome process and used it successfully.

DAVID: Again, you have reverted to your humanized God. No generalization: my specific form of God is highly purposeful, all-knowing, with no need to experiment or change His mind. To specifically answer your question about God's designing forms, My God is a designing mind who created the evolution we see. And yes 99.9% didn't survive.

dhw: All agreed already, except for your personal supposition that he is all-knowing (i.e. incapable of deliberately creating something interesting because of its unpredictability) and doesn’t want to experiment (I don’t use the word “need”). Getting new ideas does not mean changing one’s mind, but there’s no reason why he shouldn’t even do that.

A purely fully human-type God again exposed. I'll stick with my God as described.

More bacterial mat complexity

dhw: The autonomous intelligence of single-celled bacteria leads them to form communities which can become fundamentally different from single cells. It is patently absurd to argue that once they form different communities, they lose their intelligence. Hence Shapiro’s theory that cellular intelligence is the driving force behind the innovations that mark every stage of evolution. It makes perfect sense.

DAVID: At their community level their intelligent actions are real and continuous. Cellular adaptability in multicellular organisms is obvious. Shapiro's theory is an extrapolation of his bacterial studies. God makes perfect sense also.

dhw: Thank you for acknowledging the intelligence of cell communities. If by “God makes sense”, you mean it makes sense that their intelligence was designed by him, yes of course it does – if he exists. :-) If you mean that God preprogrammed every decision made by every cell community throughout life's history, or popped in to deliver instructions for every decision, then I’m afraid I’m extremely sceptical. :-(

Your general skepticism about my God is obvious.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum