Post reply

Reply to the message by David Turell

Name:

E-mail: (optional, won't be displayed directly)

Leave this field empty:

Homepage: (optional)

Leave this field empty:

Location: (optional)

Remember me (cookie)

Category:

Subject:

Formatting help

skip to input

format text bold: [b]bold text[/b]
format text italic: [i]italic text[/i]
insert hyperlink: [link=http://example.com/]link text[/link] / [link]http://example.com/[/link]
set text color: [color=#rgb]colored text[/color]
font size: [size=small]small text[/size]; [size=large]large text[/size]
insert list: [list][*]list item[/list]
insert image: [img]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; left: [img=left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; right: [img=right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail: [img=thumbnail]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail left: [img=thumbnail-left]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]; thumbnail right: [img=thumbnail-right]http://example.com/image.jpg[/img]

:-)
;-)
:-P
:-D
:-|
:-(

Message:

> > DAVID: [i]I firmly believe God is the designer who finally formed sapiens. That dinosaurs were more complex than some latter forms is of no issue.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: Dodging again. The problem here is NOT simply your firm belief that your God designed sapiens. But the process from simple to complex does not mean that he designed [b]every other [/b]life form and [b]every other food supply [/b]in life’s history, or that he did so “[b]as part of the goal of evolving [= designing] sapiens[/b]”.  You have said it yourself, with the example of the brontosaurus: “[b]There is no direct connection to humans[/b]”, and “[b]extinct life plays no role in current life[/b]”. Why don’t you agree with yourself? 99% of past organisms and food supplies have no connection with humans! That should mark the end of the discussion.[…]
> 
> The only dodge is my rejecting your version of evolution. Humans are related to all past organisms through their similar DNA genes. My quotes you offer relate to time relationships and you fully know that while you distort my theory by inferring to them out of the actual  context. I always see the issue is you refuse to accept God as the required designer and chop up evolution into unrelated time segments.    
> >
> > DAVID: [i]Again slicing and dicing evolution. There is a time continuum which you like to ignore. Of course brontosaurus diet is not our diet. The only diet we need is current supplied diet. Answering your usual silly distortions.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: Of course there is a TIME continuum! But there is no continuum from brontosaurus to sapiens. And there is no continuum, as you rightly say, from the brontosaurus food supply to the human food supply. So how could the brontosaurus and his food supply have been part of the goal to evolve (design) humans and their food supply? You are agreeing with me! Look at this statement of yours under “ironclad beetle”: 
> >  
> > DAVID:[b]Again forgetting my reasonable theory about ecosystems offering food supply for all, in all the branches of the bush not just humans in their branch.[/b]
> > 
> > dhw:  That is indeed the reasonable theory I have been trying to put across! Every extinct ecosystem offered food to its OWN forms and not in any way, shape or form, to humans! So how could they ALL have been part of the goal of evolving (= designing) humans???
> 
> Again chopping up evolution into unconnected parts. Remember God is the designer of evolution. but never in your approach, where everything is disconnected and running helter-skelter by chance. Always back to Darwin, it seems.