Replies

> But evolution is guided. That's the very heart of what Darwin discovered.

I'm sorry. I have at least two problems with this. First, survival of the fittest is a very trivial concept and can be completely circularly defined such that "fittest" is defined in terms of who survived! If it's not that circular, then it depends on an objective, even metaphysical or platonic idea of "fitness".

And: there's a huge jump from the demonstrable winning out of some genetic traits over several generations due to environmental condition, to the idea that at least statistically impossible sequences of positive mutations somehow win out over the overwhelming preponderance of bad mutations (that might not at all affect the ability to survive and reproduce, but are "bad" anyway).

Not even to mention the further assertion that humans came from animals (easily contestable on the very few purported fossil examples), that animals came from slime, and that slime came from chemicals + energy. Sure.

Ultimately, it does get down to religion, because the matter had to come from somewhere. Humans, at least, as a kind of being, are able to think about a "meta being" that's higher than them in every way. Being able to think this can easily be taken to imply the possibility that it's true, if you are optimistic at all. The fact that we can think this way certainly does not prove that we invented God. Rather the assumption must go the other way; that being able to think this way must have some purpose (else, evolutionists, why would we able to think this way?).

One current trend of unbelievers seems to be a kind of new-age / eastern / Hindu idea that there's some endless cycle of being to non-being -- before the big bang there was just another universe that collapsed. But you know, if you dig into this stuff, it gets very religious!

survival of the fittest is a very trivial concept and can be completely circularly defined

Could be, but isn't. Give me an actual example from a scientific journal where the concept has been used in a trivial or circular manner. The concept is indeed simple: many, if not most individuals differ from their parents due to mutations inclusions of viral DNA, and errors in replication. Some of these changes will confer a reproductive advantage. That's it. The only additional concept needed is that environments change, either because the earth undergoes physical change, or because a species spreads beyond its optimal habitat.

There is nothing circular in this description. It is a historical description and it can be observed as it happens. In fact there are living species caught in the middle of this process. They are called ring species. All the intermediate varieties are alive right now, at the same time.

[referring to theological speculation] ... being able to think this way must have some purpose (else, evolutionists, why would we able to think this way?)...

Seems to me it's a side-effect of abstract reasoning ability. It's rather like the ability to read and write - this had no survival value until 5000 years ago in a very few cultures, yet everyone has the ability to become literate.