Re: The Oldest Homo Sapiens: Fossils Push Human Emergence Back To 195,000 Years Ago

On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 11:50:40 -0700 "Terry M. Gray"
<grayt@lamar.colostate.edu> writes:
> > >
> >>
> >If I understand Ross and his group correctly, there are NO
> creatures
> >anatomically identical to /H. sapiens/. Dick wants to distinguish
> >Adamites (7 Ka) from the rest on the human race, which is older.
> But
> >Ross said that neanderthals were not human beings in one of his
> >essays I read. If I recall correctly, he claims that human beings
> >originated about 50 Ka. I haven't seen a response to the more
> recent
> >"little people" from Flores Island described as similar to /H.
> >erectus/.
> >
> >Both Dick and Glenn hold that creatures evolved, so my question
> does
> >not affect their views. But Ross holds that all creatures were
> >directly created, with no more than microevolutionary changes
> >involved. This provides that God created monocellular entities,
> >followed by more complex ones produced by fiat, most of which
> became
> >extinct, and finally created the most complex creatures, man last
> of
> >all. How can an omniscient and omnipotent deity be so limited as to
>
> >have to experimentally develop creatures that can finally function
>
> >adequately? Why is his God so slow to catch on to what is
> >functional? Ross's approach seems consonant with process theology,
>
> >not orthodoxy.
> >Dave
>
>
> Dave,
>
> I've never understood this accusation. Can't God do whatever he
> wants? Even in his special creation.
>
> TG
>
Terry,
The point simply assumes that the deity understands as much about
efficiency as human engineers. During the '70s, approximately, they hung
one device after another on automobile engines to control pollution, and
to correct the mess that the previous addition had made. I had a '72 car
that never ran right, despite the attentions of an engineer sent out from
Detroit. Then they got the bright idea of rethinking the whole matter,
along with the development of computer chips and other devices and
techniques, and regained efficiency. The miserable gas mileage and slow
modification was a consequence of human limitations. Indeed,
if Ford, Olds, etc., had understood what we know today, they would not
have invented horseless carriages.

If God is creating each species or genus /de novo/, then we assume that
he would produce a finished form, not one that would die and have to be
superseded time after time with new fiat creations. We would not have
found a half-dozen creatures on their way to becoming the efficient
cetaceans of today's oceans. You can find this principle in Augustine,
who claimed that the Almighty created everything instantaneously, though
it had to unfold over time. But the unfolding was perfect, not
Ambylocetus or Pachycetus on their way to becoming efficient. In
contrast, if God is using secondary causes to produce developed creatures
over billions of years, we expect the half-way entities. To be sure, God
acts as he sees fit, but does he know what he is doing beforehand, or
does he bumble along like his creatures, us? We are as efficient as our
understanding and finances allow us to be. Why should we expect God to be
less efficient than omniscience and omnipotence allow him to be if he is
acting directly rather than mediately? Indeed, I would further ask why
God needed six days to fashion the heavens and the earth when he could
have had everything up and functioning in less than an attosecond.
Dave
Dave
Received on Wed Mar 2 15:14:59 2005