Return to David's theory of evolution (Evolution)

by David Turell , Wednesday, February 07, 2024, 17:46 (288 days ago) @ dhw

dhw: You continue to conflate the two sets of statistics. 1) Yes, all current species are the product of their own line, and 99.9% of their ancestors have disappeared. […] 2) No, 99.9% of all the life forms that ever existed were NOT the ancestors of current species, but were dead ends, as you […] vividly illustrated with all your comments on dinosaurs.
Your latest evasion (repeated in your response to all the questions and blatant self-contradictions) is to reproduce the first set of statistics.

DAVID: 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!" Each line contributed to the 99.9% extinct.

dhw: Once more: yes, the 0.1% of all life forms that are here now evolved, and 99.9% of their lines are extinct, Those that are here are indeed their descendants. And yes, the 99.9% of their ancestors contributed to the 99.9% extinction of ALL lines, including the vast majority which did NOT lead to the 0.1% that are here. Start from the beginning, and as time passes, you have millions of lines and species that come and go. 99.9% of the lines do NOT lead to contemporary species. They are dead ends. 0.1% do lead to contemporary species, 99.9% of whose ancestors are also extinct but were not dead ends. However, they are also part of the 99.9% that are extinct. All you have done is conflate the two sets of statistics: (1) contemporary lines with their 99.9% extinction rate of ancestors, and (2) EVERY line that ever existed, with a 99.9% extinction rate. Summary: as you agreed in the first place when asked the question:
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: So please stop pretending that you disagree with yourself, and face up to the fact that this statistic leads to the illogical combination of theories which you are so desperate to avoid discussing: If, as you believe, your all-powerful, all-knowing God’s one and only purpose was to design contemporary species, including us, why would he have deliberately and knowingly designed and then culled 99.9 out of 100 species that had no connection with that purpose? Your response so far has been one evasion after another (as above), or the frank admission that you have no idea, but as you won’t consider any other theory, yours must be true, and only God knows why he would act in such a messy, cumbersome and inefficient manner (your own description).

I have never evaded your criticism. I see God as providing the vast bush of life for human use. Thus, there is nothing discarded as you state. Nothing with no connection. Following the assumption of God in charge, God produced the history of evolution we have discovered and in the development of all forms, 99.9% of their ancestors went extinct, the natural culling process of evolution. No dead ends to God's purpose. You have distorted all of this in your amazing statement: "knowingly designed and then culled 99.9 out of 100 species that had no connection with that purpose", exactly the opposite to the facts as applied to God. All the species God wanted are here for our use. You see a wasteful process when there is none. I think you deliberately avoid the concept of purpose. As for why God used the method, we call evolution, is obviously unknown. And yes, my description fits.