More miscellany (Evolution)

by David Turell , Tuesday, July 16, 2024, 18:22 (128 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Proportionality is still the answer. What you see as evil is generally a coagulation of small events, side effects of all the good.

dhw: 50 million victims of God’s flu virus, 6 million Jews exterminated as a side effect of God giving humans free will...small events, not worth bothering about. But we now have your ultimate answer: your God is schizophrenic.

God is not schizophrenic, but I approach God in two ways, as a believer and as a sceptic.

Back to David’s “schizophrenia”

DAVID: A perfect God picked His preferred method to evolve us, and He did it. Our human analysis notes evolution is a cumbersome method. God didn't ask for our opinion.

DAVID: Your usual distorted view of any evolutionary process which requires culling.

dhw: How many evolutions of life do you know of?

The one we both know.

DAVID: As above, evolution is a cumbersome way compared to direct creation. If God chose it, it must be the best way. I am totally content with that view.

dhw: Yes, you are totally content with your view that your perfect God is not only schizophrenic but is also imperfect enough to choose a purpose and method which even you regard as inefficient. And you absolutely refuse to consider any interpretation of your God’s work that allows him to have a purpose and method which make perfect sense together.

Your interpretations humanize God.

Jumping gene controls

DAVID: Your usual distortion of evolutionary statistics. As usual, you ignored the issue of the lack of directionality/purpose in Darwin theory.

dhw: There is no distortion. You have agreed that 99.9% of past life forms did not lead to those now present.

DAVID: Agreed from the 0.1% coming from their ancestors, the 99.9%.

dhw: One of you (probably your Jekyll) agreed emphatically that 99.9% were NOT the ancestors of the 0.1%.

The 0.1% must have ancestors!!! The 99.9%!! Simple math: all of evolution is 100%, isn't it?

dhw: I note that you have now bracketed directionality and purpose together, after I had asked you to explain the difference.

DAVID: Purpose produces directionality.

dhw:So your God’s purpose was to create the 0.1% (us and our food), and his “directionality” was to create 99.9 out of 100 species that had nothing to do with his purpose. I get it. That’s why your version of God is that he is inefficient as well as schizophrenic.

God is not schizophrenic. I have a split approach to Him.

Genome complexity
QUOTE: "[…] those little regulatory RNAs are generally too small to carry enough information for their unions to be very selective; they too work collectively, arriving at a decision, as it were, by committee. (dhw’s bold)

DAVID: Cells can simply follow genome directions. The only real intelligence we see requires neurons.

dhw: How do you define “real” intelligence? Why can’t “simply following genome instructions” mean that the instructions are issued by an autonomous intelligence within the cell? Neurons are also cells. Bacteria do not have them, but their ability to outwit humans is well proven – or have you now decided that God keeps telling them what to do?

DAVID: God's DNA instructions allow them to act as they do.

dhw: More obfuscation. Does God instruct them what to do, or has he given them the means whereby they can decide autonomously what to do?

The cells follow information/directions in the genome. They appear intelligent because their directions are intelligently designed.