More miscellany Parts One & Two (Evolution)

by David Turell , Sunday, September 15, 2024, 18:40 (67 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: The logic is design is required, thus a designing mind is required.

dhw: And the logic is that if a designing mind is required to explain the existence of designing minds, then the designing mind must have been designed by a designing mind. Back we go to the choice between two “first causes”, as above.

No. First means first. The designing mind in uncaused.

Two Neanderthal types

DAVID: It won't close existing gaps.

dhw: How do you know?

DAVID: Gaps are well established even if you wish they weren't. Remember Gould's quote.

dhw: Of course there will always be gaps! Who expects to find fossils covering every stage of every species for the last 3.8 billion years? I don’t wish anything. I simply look for convincing explanations of the history we know. Which Gould quote? I find his theory of punctuated equilibrium absolutely convincing.

DAVID: Gould quote paraphrased: hidden secret in paleontology is tips of branches without continuity.

dhw: The tip of a branch would be its end. “Without continuity” sounds like Raup’s 99.9% extinction. Why don’t you just stick to the point: there will always be gaps.

YES

Recent new modifications

DAVID: This is support for Shapiro's theory that DNA can be edited. An evolutionary example of adaptation, but not evidence of speciation, which is still a totally unknown process.

dhw: Once again,I must thank you for your integrity in presenting POSSIBLE evidence for a theory of which you disapprove. There are many crystal clear examples of adaptation, but the distinction between adaptation and innovation is sometimes blurred. Pre-whales and pre-humans might be taken as prime examples. Although we agree that speciation is still an unknown process, the very fact that DNA can be edited is a major plus for Shapiro’s theory: if cells are capable of editing their own DNA, where and why do you draw a limit?

DAVID: No evidence cells produce speciation.

dhw: It’s a theory based on their established ability to edit their own DNA. There is no evidence that an unknown, eternal mind programmed or dabbled every innovation, lifestyle, strategy etc. In your case, it’s a theory based on the definite type of God you want: i.e. an omnipotent, omniscient, purposeful God whose only purpose was to design us plus food, and who therefore inexplicably and inefficiently designed every species, though he then had to cull 99.9% of them because they were irrelevant to his purpose.

That is the huge gap in your thinking: all of evolution evolved the present supply of plants and animals providing food and materials for human use. Nothing extraneous. Culling simply equals the process.