New Miscellany 2: atheism, eco, future, fossils (General)

by dhw, Wednesday, May 21, 2025, 12:39 (12 days ago) @ dhw

New oxygen research

DAVID: Your faith in combinatorial progress hy chance is irrational [...]

dhw: When will you stop pretending that I am an atheist? I have no faith in chance, and I have no faith in a sourceless form of omnipotent, omniscient consciousness. One of these theories must be closer to the truth than the other, but each of them demands a degree of faith which I do not have. That is why I am an agnostic.

DAVID: That God exists is a 50/50 statement for you, so at least 50% of your thinking is atheist.

Of course, but in our discussions concerning your ridicule of your God by means of an absurdly illogical theory of evolution, and when I offer you alternative theistic interpretations of life’s history, it is my theistic 50% that is talking.

Early life

DAVID: […] As an aside to dhw note: "In ecosystems today, life is so deeply entwined with itself that very few creatures live directly off Earth's raw materials. That has been the case for a very, very long time." When I have told you the ecosystems are exquisitely entwined this statement proves the point.(dhw's bolds)

dhw: The fact that ecosystems today are deeply entwined is not an issue between us. The issue which you continuously try to avoid is your claim that all ecosystems past and present were specifically designed for the sole purpose of producing and supporting us humans and our food, even though the vast majority of extinct ecosystems had no connection at all with us and our food.

DAVID: You want to lose the past, which is what developed todays ecosystems which support humans.

dhw: It is you who want to lose the past, because you have accepted the fact that 99.9% of past species and their ecosystems had no connection with us and our food. Hence your now bolded comment about the ecosystems of today.

DAVID: Culling is successful evolution, but not in your distorted view.

In your view, a God who deliberately creates 99.9 out of 100 species irrelevant to the purpose you impose on him is a messy, inefficient designer. See Part 1 for the rest of the argument, and for my challenge.

DAVID: The future is unknown to us. I have specifically said evolution is over. The Earth has evolved to support us. So I see us as the purposeful endpoint.

dhw: Since the future is unknown to us, it is patently absurd to tell us that evolution is over!!! So much for your proof that we are the purposeful endpoint!

DAVID: Do you see any speciation? Evolution is over.

There is no speciation at the moment, but since the future is unknown to us, it is illogical to assume that there will be no further speciation in the future! (NB For all we know, future speciation may produce life forms vastly less intelligent than humans but better able to survive new conditions.)

Human evolution: in Indonesia area

dhw: Yet more new fossils. Until every inch of the Earth has been explored, there will always be new fossils to help fill in the history. Re the quotes: Every find can be called unique in one way or another, even if it’s only in a new location, but I like your comment, which puts it in perspective. I wish researchers wouldn’t constantly tell us how important their work is! Or am I being too cynical?

DAVID: New fossils are filling recognized gaps.

Yes, it’s happening all the time, so it’s perhaps a bit premature to say that recognized gaps will never be filled.

Astrocytes new found role

DAVID: They were placed there for a reason and now that reason is now understood. From a design standpoint having systems for slower reactions makes perfect sense.

dhw: The experiments on fish, mice and fruit flies confirm that all cells in all types of brain will have a function. From a “design standpoint”, this will apply whether the design is carried out directly by your God, or by intelligent cell communities recognizing the need for certain types of reaction. The latter theory does not exclude your God as its designer.

DAVID: True agnosticism.

Thank you. A welcome sign that you are beginning to understand that agnosticism is not synonymous with atheism.