More Miscellany: Bechly reappears (General)

by dhw, Friday, June 14, 2024, 10:52 (12 days ago) @ David Turell

Examples of Darwinist thinking: Insect adaptations

dhw: You have convinced yourself that “evolution repeats itself” is phony, “totally overblown Darwin-speak propaganda”, even though it introduces an article which attacks Darwin’s theory of randomness. If I said that God's use of "evolution requires extinctions", or "has resulted in countless varieties of organisms, lifestyles, strategies etc.", would that be overblown Darwin-speak propaganda" just because I haven't said evolution requires speciation?

DAVID: The headline called it "EVOLUTION" Did the article describe evolution? No! It described repeated similar adaptations within species.

This is one of the silliest discussions we have ever had. I will leave you to your Darwinophobic interpretation of a title which introduces the fact that in the course of evolution, the same species may repeat earlier solutions to the same problems. (See also under “bacteria use bacteriophages”.)

Cyanobacteria

DAVID: Purpose is built into all of life's activities by design.

dhw: And I have no objection to the theory that the means (autonomous cellular intelligence) of fulfilling their purpose (survival) may have been built into all life forms by design. Shapiro is still with us.

DAVID: Ah, yes, DNA editing bacteria.

dhw: You seem to have forgotten that Shapiro’s theory of cellular intelligence – supported by many scientists from different disciplines – extends to all organisms.

DAVID: I know where it extends.

So please stop pretending that it is confined to DNA editing bacteria.

Oxygen and the Cambrian (now the nature of God)

DAVID: A purposeful God created humans. The many forms come from a major problem. Whoever God is, is up for grabs. We are faced with a totally unknown personage.

dhw: A purposeful God must have had a purpose for all life forms, including the 99.9% that had no connection with humans. Your acknowledgement of “up for grabs” and “totally unknown” completely demolishes your prejudiced insistence that your God is certainly not human in any way. Dealt with on the other thread, but worth repeating here, as I shall keep note of it for whenever you present your own preconceived ideas and object to any alternatives.

DAVID: I have simply admitted the form of the deity has as many forms are there are religions, Eastern and Western.

dhw: You have admitted that “everyone chooses the God he wishes to believe in”, “there are as many forms of God as people invent him”, whoever he is, is “up for grabs”, and he is “totally unknown”. If someone chooses to invent a God who creates a free-for-all, enjoys what he does, wants to be worshipped, hates boredom, then it is totally absurd for you to claim that their invention must be wrong, just because it conflicts with your own invention.

DAVID: I am allowed to choose what I wish.

And so is everyone else, which is why we have these discussions concerning the feasibility of our invented versions.

Oxidation

dhw: If there is a God, I can’t help feeling that all this teeter tottering is far more redolent of experimentation than of a precise knowledge of what is required for the fulfilment of a single purpose. Wouldn’t you agree?

DAVID: No, I would call it a designer adjusting.

So despite his omnipotence and omniscience, you believe he has to keep making changes as he goes along. What does he adjust to? Sounds more like experimentation than knowledge of exactly what is required, don’t you think?

bacteria use bacteriophages in warfare

“QUOTE: The bacteria had taken a phage and repurposed it for warfare with other bacteria, now using it to kill competing bacteria."

DAVID: God designs what we need if we look for it.

Sounds as if your God (if he exists) designed a great big free-for-all, as all organisms are left to work out their own ways of winning the war for survival.

QUOTE…evolution has maintained the diversity of tailocin variants over the century-scale," he said.

I’m surprised you haven’t objected vehemently to this statement about evolution as phony, overblown Darwin speak propaganda.