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:

> > [b]Theology[/b]
> > 
> > [b]God and evolution: weaverbirds[/b]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Assuming a God in action, we must accept the history of evolution as it presents itself. [/i]
> > 
> >  dhw:  Agreed.
> > 
> > DAVID:[i] Why God did it this way is totally unknown and cannot deny my theory on those grounds[/i].
> > 
> > dhw: The fact that God’s purpose, methods and nature are  unknown should make you open to different theories, but you illogically ridicule your God as all-powerful, all-knowing, and yet messy and inefficient. You also complain illogically that alternative theories “humanize” him, although you believe he probably has thought patterns and emotions like ours, and you even list some of them (enjoyment, interest, desire for a relationship, recognition, worship).
> 
> Your constant humanizing of God offers no advance in understanding God's nature.
> > 
> > dhw: [i]You cannot accept the possibility that maybe one or both parts of your theory might be wrong.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]What is an alternative to humans? I don't see one, do you?[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: We're not dealing with alternative versions of evolution’s history, but with the history we know. Humans are the latest products. How does that explain your God’s ridiculously inefficient use of evolution? 
> 
> We are here against all naturally positive odds. We are the end of evolution as we know it.
> > 
> > [b]Balance of Nature: human[/b]
> > 
> > dhw:[i] Any government that went that far would be voted out of office (in a democracy) or threatened with revolution (in a dictatorship). But Trump’s current policies (“Drill, baby, drill” and withdrawal from the Paris Agreement) will now make it virtually impossible to get international consensus to reduce dependence on fossil fuels and on other factors that are already causing so much damage.[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]But it will improve the USA economy, and as a citizen, I approve. China and India are not following the proposed Paris rules while still joined to the agreement![/i]
> > 
> > dhw: You praise your loggers and would like to ask Brazil to follow suit, but now you’re happy to support some of the worst polluters in the world for NOT taking the necessary steps to restore Nature’s balance! Are you proud of Trump for following their example instead of that of his own loggers?
> 
> I'm happy with drill baby drill to improve the USA economic position in the world..
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]Proper new research on reforestation:[/i]
> > 
> > DAVID: [i]You are still an alarmist. The Guardian spews alarmism and your life does not allow time to study the nitty-gritty.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw:  I don’t read The Guardian, and please stop pretending that all the scientists who disagree with you are stupid or ignorant or corrupt, and haven’t studied the nitty-gritty.
> 
> You spew Guardian propaganda unwittily. I specifically suggested you get some knowledge of the nitty gritty instead of your cook book propagandist point of view.
> > 
> > [b]How fungi help plants[/b]:
> > https://knowablemagazine.org/content/article/food-environment/2025/mycorrhizal-fungi-he...
> > 
> > dhw: The article describes how certain fungi can be helpful, but may also be damaging.
> > 
> > DAVID:[i] I doubt the Guardian would give this article big headlines. However, science is quietly aware of the current agricultural problems, as this article demonstrates. But among climatologists there is great disagreement as to the accuracy of the climate models predictive ability. There are so many factors which must be included.[/i]
> > 
> > dhw: I’m glad you are aware that scientists are aware of current agricultural problems, just as they are aware of damage caused by fossil fuels, current means of transport, and deforestation. Yes, there are disagreements about the future, but why would you personally encourage the Brazilians, Chinese and Indians to carry on ruining their environment? Why do you prefer “as slowly as you like” to “as quickly as possible”?
> 
> The so-called peril is in a distant future hundred of years from now.