Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Friday, February 02, 2024, 21:51 (84 days ago) @ dhw

99.9% versus 0.1%

DAVID: How did you conclude that? EVERY LINE IN THE BRANCHING BUSH CAME FROM EXTINCT ANCESTORS. I HAVE CONCLUDED that each line can be considered under Raup's statistical analysis as 99.9% of each line's ancestors contributed to their surviving 0.1%.

dhw: This is what I called the first statistic, which we agree on. But every line in the branching bush did not lead to the species that exist today! The vast majority were dead ends, and you were kind enough to offer us a perfect illustration: “Dinosaurs are 100% dead. They might be the ancestors of birds but that is disputed now.” Even if birds did descend from dinosaurs, they would only have descended from one branch. All other dinosaur branches were a dead end that did not lead to contemporary species. Note the exchange between us when I explained this:

dhw: you have confirmed the obvious fact that at the very least, the vast majority of dinosaurs were NOT the ancestors of current species.

DAVID: Agreed. They are part of the 99.9% culled.

dhw: So you agree your God culled the 99.9% of dinosaurs which were NOT our ancestors. And since you believe that most of our ancestors were designed “de novo” (i.e. with no preceding species) 500 million years ago, you can add approx. 3.3 billion years’ worth of species as more dead ends from which we were not directly descended. And you continue to ignore your repeated agreements of last month, e.g:
dhw: Do you believe that we and our food are directly descended from 99.9% of all creatures that ever lived?

DAVID: No. From the 0.1% surviving.

dhw: Your “no” is your agreement that 99.9% were not the ancestors of current species, so why are you now denying it?

The 99.9% are the direct ancestors of the 0.1% surviving!!! They represent all the lines of forms that previously existed to get here. Each twig and branch go back to the beginning.

DAVID: God did not destroy species, but instead purposely created the species humans would need. What was removed were transient forms being perfected into today's excellent results.

dhw: According to you, he designed every species, which included all the species humans would not need. Or are you now telling us that humans needed all the dinosaurs and all the species that died before the Cambrian? These were species humans would NOT need and which were among the 99.9% which according to you he destroyed/culled as follows:

DAVID: Raup considered extinctions bad luck, which means to me God planned for their extinctions by creating new challenges they could not handle, thus culling.

dhw: He didn’t destroy them, but he planned to cull them by creating challenges he knew they couldn’t handle. Sounds pretty destructive to me.

Yes, destroyed many.

dhw: Summary: 99.9% of the ancestors of current species are extinct. Only 0.1% of all extinct species were the ancestors of current species. You believe current species, with humans in charge, were your God’s one and only goal, and you have no idea why he would have specially created and culled the 99.9% of extinct species that had no connection with his one and only goal.

DAVID: Stop your repetition of a falsehood. All are connected to humans, since we run the Earth and used all of it. All living forms now are here because God put them here for us.

dhw: What falsehood? Are you still maintaining that we and our contemporary species are directly descended from 99.9% of extinct species? That every past and present species was/is “connected” to humans, although 99.9% of past species aren’t even here? Please explain which part of my summary is a “falsehood”.

Your total confusion about the 99.9% statistic from Raup.

DAVID: Your view is still totally skewed. Read my bold above. Not your concept!!!

dhw: I have replied to your bolds. Now please tell me which part of my summary is a falsehood.

Your total confusion is about the 99.9% statistic from Raup Raup simply was telling us that to achieve today's living, 99.9% went extinct along the way. He did not use the word species." Using us as example, I interpret that to mean in our branch back to the very beginning 99.9% of all form were eliminated by extinction. And this applies to each living form on Earth. The intent was only to produce all that are here. Losing forms was an intended part of the process. All culled were for good reason, to produce the current result. Not your turn-about tortured ridiculous interpretation of wasteful loss.