Hi shadow, welcome to EvC.
shadow71 writes:
paulk writes,
quote:
How about you start by presenting the evidence for your "divine guidance" and showing that it is equivalent to that fro natural selection ? Because obviously you already have that all worked out to back up the accusation of double standards in the OP. Really I'm amazed that it wasn't in the OP, because it should have been.
One starting point would be a quote from Paul Davies THE MIND OF GOD, P.16 of Preface.
I belong to the group of scientists who do not subscribe to a conventional religion but nevertheless deny that the universe is a purposeless accident. Through my scientific work I have come to
believe more and more strongly that the physical universe is put together with an ingenuity so
astonishing that I cannot accept it merely as a brute fact.There must,
it seems to me, be a deeper level of explanation. Whether one wishes to call that deeper level 'God' is a matter of taste and definition.
Emphasis mine.
So you think Davies' beliefs and astonishment about the Universe constitute evidence about biological evolution?
If this was anything other than his argument from incredulity you should expect him to provide references to the
actual experiments or observations he made and the conclusions that provide "a deeper level of explanation" that have been published in scientific journals.
A scientist's personal opinions about some hypothetical deeper meaning for the Universe, for which there is no physical evidence, has no more validity than anyone else's.
He is right, the Universe is an amazing thing, but there is not one shred of evidence that it is the result of anything but natural processes.
I do not see how this has anything to do with whether evolution and natural selection are guided by god or not.
What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python
You can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley
™ Version 4.2
