Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Sunday, February 04, 2024, 19:12 (82 days ago) @ dhw

99.9% versus 0.1%

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: In your reply (far below), you have ignored all of this.

DAVID: They represent all the lines of forms that previously existed to get here. Each twig and branch go back to the beginning.

dhw: 99.9% of them were lines that eventually led nowhere. Only 0.1% of lines “got here”. But yes, third theory: all forms of life (twigs and branches) go back to the roots of the bush. But 99.9% of them were dead ends that did not go forward to us and our contemporaries.

dhw: It is a common device of yours to reproduce what is generally agreed, and to ignore those of your theories that make no sense.

I continue to dispute what I bolded!! The 0.1% here are the result of 99.9% of EACH LINE evolving. 99.9% did not go nowhere!!! Their decedents are all here!

God’s culling

DAVID: God did not destroy species.

dhw: Contradicted by:

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.

DAVID: Yes, destroyed many.

dhw: Blatant contradiction ignored.

We have two discordant views. See above. I view a purposeful God as evolving desired species over time. Purpose! Thus, I look at each line as protected until it reached the present. A future species was designated to appear, so the intended outcome was always protected.

DAVID: 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.

DAVID: A repeat: The 0.1% surviving lost 99.9% of their ancestors to reach here.

dhw: Correct. That does not mean 99.9% of all the species that ever lived were the ancestors of today's species. 99.9% of them were dead ends, e.g. the dinosaurs.

God's intended result were birds, the 0.1% from the 99.9% as dinosaurs.

DAVID: Humans are one species of over eight million on Earth. Like humans, each one had a line of ancestors.

dhw: Correct.

DAVID: Viewing life as a bush, all species are at the end of twigs at the top of the bush.

dhw: I presume you mean all current species are at the top of the bush. If so, correct.

DAVID: The body of the bush is the 99.9% lost.

dhw: If you mean all the branches and twigs that ended below the top, correct.

DAVID: Your now-bolded statement is wrong. The 99.9% led here to over eight million.

dhw: Completely wrong, as you agreed in all the quotes at the start of this post. The 99.9% did NOT lead here, e.g. the dinosaurs. If birds were the only surviving species, then 99.9% of dinosaurs were branches that did NOT lead here. Only 0.1% have reached the top of the bush. The “body” is the 99.9% that didn’t! You have agreed multiple times: current species are descended from the 0.1% of the branches that continued to evolve, i.e. that survived; the 99.9% stopped evolving and became dead ends. Listen to yourself again:
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: Correct. So please stop dodging.

Each evolving line that reached the present 0.1% had a 99.9% loss of ancestors getting here. Yes, the branching twigs disappeared but the intended species are here. True?