Return to David's theory of evolution PARTS 1 & 2 (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, May 10, 2022, 09:36 (723 days ago) @ David Turell

Chixculub

DAVID: The bush has many goals along the way to finally humans.

dhw: […] Please tell us what other goals he had apart from designing humans and our food.

DAVID: There are many intermediate goals.

Such as?

dhw: […] you don’t even know if Chixculub was a deliberate action or an accident? Wouldn’t a “totally new direction” following an unplanned accident suggest a change of mind, and again, why bother designing the dinosaurs if all he wanted right from the start was H. sapiens?

DAVID: I'll stick with planning for mammals.
And
DAVID: There were obvious stepwise goals all along the way to humans, the final goal.

dhw: Please tell us how your God’s designing of dinosaurs, and their subsequent deliberate or accidental extinction after about 150 million years, demonstrate that your God’s one and only plan was to design “stepwise” Homo sapiens and our food?

DAVID: Exactly stepwise, each stage setting up the next.

So please tell us how you think your God's special design of the brontosaurus, and then either making or letting it go extinct (what you call going in a “totally new direction”), constituted a stage in his design of H. sapiens plus food.

Schroeder

DAVID: […] Shroeder's thinking is just like mine. Your thought patterns are just not in our fraternity.

dhw: Still learning, changes his presence and his mind, allows nature to rebel (general characteristics illustrated by biblical stories)…..Not quite the same as your all-powerful, always-in-control God who knows and does exactly what he wants right from the start, is it? The extract stops before evolution, so are you sure he believes God designed every species and food bush in preparation for us, and does Schroeder also tell us that only God knows why he didn’t design us directly?

DAVID: I've read all his books, spoken with him personally at a book presentation and I fully believe he would be my twin in these discussions.

dhw: The above shows major differences between his concept of God and yours. However, if he really does believe in your combined theories of evolution [...], which remains the issue in dispute between us, please tell us how he explains what you find impossible to explain.

DAVID: He explains it in his terms to me. My theories are from a distillation of Schroeder.

If Schroeder was able to explain why your God, whose one and only purpose was to design H. sapiens plus food, designed countless life forms that did not lead to H. sapiens plus food, and why your God chose to design H. sapiens in stages rather than directly, I’m sure you would remember his explanation. Or did he agree with you that it couldn’t be explained and it only made sense to God?

DAVID: Schroeder views God just as I do. Read his four books to see it. His guess about Chixculub shows it. Reading a 'blurb' about his books doesn't tell you anything evidentiary. Schroeder helped make me be what I believe.

And so did Adler, except that Adler didn’t touch on your illogical theory of evolution, which is the matter in dispute on this thread and which you constantly gloss over with your generalizations. I can only repeat that if Schroeder supports your theory of evolution and can’t explain it, then his thinking is as illogical as yours. As for the blurb, I’m surprised that the concept of a learning God should be included if in actual fact he views God as you do, namely an all-powerful being who knows exactly what he’s doing and has planned all the details in advance.