Evolution and humans: all over Africa (Evolution)

by dhw, Tuesday, October 24, 2017, 11:59 (696 days ago) @ David Turell

DAVID: Adaptation does not provide the long term planning of full speciation.

dhw: I dispute your assumption that speciation requires long term planning. You have ignored the rest of my paragraph in which I accept that there is no evidence that the inventive mechanism can extend its range to speciation. That is why it is a hypothesis, just like that of an unknown being preprogramming or dabbling every single innovation, lifestyle and natural wonder.

DAVID: Using the whale series, it is obvious lots of planning is required.

There is nothing “obvious” about an unknown being who 3.8 billion years ago provided the first living cells with plans for eight stages of whale, or who alternatively dabbled eight times to “plan” different stages of whale before and after they entered the water.

DAVID: God does what He prefers to do. I accept that. My problem is the whales which I view from a human standpoint. In that view, it seems a lot of extra effort to arrange for ocean balance of nature, but I fully believe it was easy for God. So be it. God's logic is not ours.

dhw: You might say the same for the weaverbird’s nest, the monarch’s lifestyle and migration, the wasp that lays its eggs on the spider’s back, the toxin-eating snake: a lot of extra effort to arrange for terrestrial balance of nature. Of course it would have been easy for God, but it simply doesn’t fit in with your theory that it had to be done in order to keep life going until he could produce humans, even though he is perfectly capable of instantaneous creation. I suggest your logic may not be your God’s.

DAVID: You are right. The whales bother me, but I'm using human logic, not God's. Exactly the point. And I might add your view of God is to humanize Him.

We both have no choice but to use human logic, and there is no reason whatsoever to suppose that my logical explanation of the whale is wrong just because I’m human, and your hypothesis is right because although it doesn’t make sense to you, your God doesn’t think like you! My hypothesis that God watches his creation with interest is no less human but far more logical than your hypothesis that God watches his creation with interest but his interest is not what we humans mean by “interest”.

Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum