Evolution is wack;God is the only way that makes sense!

[Buddha12]

These are the things science can't answer but bible can.

So let's examine that statement. Who wrote the Bible, man not a woman. That man or men were under some kind of psychological disorder for they heard things being told to them by some supernatural being...God. Did they question that God at all, trying to discern what exactly it was and why it all of a sudden wanted to speak only to them and not communicate to everyone so that God would be heard and understood by everyone as to what it was saying. Strange that only a handful of men could hear this God and only from time to time, which again suggests some kind of psychological disorder among those few men.

Then the Bible was written in two parts as well, the first part , the old testament was written by the Jews but the Christians wanted to put another spin on it so they started another chapter, the new testament, a few thousand years ago. Again men wrote this second chapter, I wonder why men are the only ones who get these supernatural speeches, but I digress, and they wrote what again was told to them by this supernatural entity they named God. They must have been afflicted with the same psychological disorder as the first men who wrote this book it would seem. But my point is that men wrote this book, not God itself, and God could just as easily talk to everyone to let them know it exists but only choose a few men to write what it said. Why should we trust what man writes about since we all know man is a story teller at heart. :shrug:

 

[Aqueous Id]

I'll throw in: It looks designed, it acts like it has some kind of a purpose.

I think IDists rely very much on this rationale. To say it looks designed is to form a conclusion outside of a relevant pool of knowledge. For the biologist, who studies form and function, homologous structuring is one of many kids of evidence favoring evolution over ID.

Your next point is also common with IDers:

Most thing that have a function, and look designed, usually are designed, in my experience.

A significant difference is that for each and every one of those, you've been able to attribute them to a real flesh and blood maker. None of the ID kind has been found. What have been found are the tools of nature that Darwin's work anticipates.

Another thought that came to mind was the way some artists will throw paint at a canvas, or program a white noise source with a cello, etc. Some critics will say "it (looks/sounds) like (a mudslide/a boiler room)" etc. In this case, the thing that looks or sounds erratic is possibly even painstakingly planned.

The evidence against intelligent design includes congenital defects.

 

[Crunchy Cat]

garbonzo,

Are these arguments that your dad has given you? The context of what you are posting isn't clear in the least.

 

[spidergoat]

We would go crazy if we wouldn't think we are somehow designed and with a purpose.

True chaotism = instant madness.

Nonsense. Evolution isn't chaos. I don't think we were designed or have a purpose, and I'm not mad.

I'll throw in: It looks designed, it acts like it has some kind of a purpose.
Most thing that have a function, and look designed, usually are designed, in my experience.

jan.

That's why we have science, which shows us that even things that look designed actually aren't.

 

[Yazata]

You guys say trying to fit the idea of God doesn’t really work out?

I don't understand that sentence.

Are you kidding me?

And trying to fit an idea of everything just happened from nothing works out?

"Fit an idea"?

I'm basically an agnostic when it come to the big questions. How the universe originated is something I don't know the answer to. Why reality exists in the first place, is something I don't know the answer to.

But I guess that I'm also an atheist in the sense that I don't think that the deities of the religious traditions literally exist, or that they provide satisfactory answers to the big questions.

If you really think our body, brain, internal organs, nature, animals, insects, scientific laws and so on is not the evidence of an intelligent design then you’re not an engineer.

The design argument is simply an appeal to an analogy. Humans design objects with functional form. Nature provides examples of objects with functional form that weren't designed by humans. So (the analogy goes) there must be an invisible super-powered analogue of a human craftsman out there somewhere that designed the things that humans didn't.

The unstated assumption is that design is the only way to explain functional form.

I think that evolutionary theory has dramatically reduced the plausibility of the design argument over the last 150 years, by providing a credible and increasingly well-evidenced alternative account of how the functional form could have gotten there, that doesn't need to anthropomorphically imagine a hypothetical invisible craftsman.

 

[Yazata]

The design of the human body is not especially intelligently thought out. Our resporatory systems seem to be 'designed' to work best in a horizontal position. Then there's the appendix. And the little toe.

What would make you think that the human body was actually planned out?

There's an e-book on one of my usb drives somewhere (maybe I'll go hunt it up this afternoon), in which an anatomist provides endless examples of what we might call odd design features of the human body. Features that start to make perfect sense if we look at them in terms of our species' evolutionary history.

Apparently it's even more dramatic if we look at it in terms of genomics. There are whole blocks of DNA code in humans that are pretty much identical to blocks of code in distantly removed animals like fish. That might not be the most effective way to encode what's happening today in humans. But if hundreds of millions of years ago these blocks of code proved vital for some aspect of early fetal development or cellular physiology that were critical for life, then natural selection will preserve those old ways of doing things pretty zealously. Code for phenotypic features that are less critical to survival, which might prove to be optional and have different selective value in different circumstances, tend to evolve a lot faster.

 

[NMSquirrel]

:crazy: You see! This is why I think we should move the Religion forum in with UFO sightings or pseudoscience.

so are you so uninformed,that you could not discuss this issue?
Or would you rather just fall back to trolling your prejudices?

have you been reading along?
don't you have anything intelligent to add to the discussion?

have you learned anything new yet?
i suspect you think you already know everything..

come on Epictetus..step up to intelligent conversation!

 

[Balerion]

We would go crazy if we wouldn't think we are somehow designed and with a purpose.

True chaotism = instant madness.

How do you explain all the perfectly sane people who do not believe they are designed and without purpose?

 

[Saturnine Pariah]

You guys say trying to fit the idea of God doesn’t really work out? Are you kidding me?

And trying to fit an idea of everything just happened from nothing works out?

If you really think our body, brain, internal organs, nature, animals, insects, scientific laws and so on is not the evidence of an intelligent design then you’re not an engineer.

Only reason why scientists don’t believe in creation is because most of religious creationists believe and teach literal 24 hours a day 6 day creation 6000 years ago.*

If they just come to sense that bibles ‘6 day’ creation is actually 4.5billion BC – 6000 BC divided into 6 phases, there will be a lot more scientist backing creation because everything in nature is just phenomenal.*

Scientists have tried for years to create life out of nothing but failed.
What makes you think if technology advances further that you can actually create life out of nothing?

And If we’re talking about biology why would you need technology to do that?*

It’s either you can or can’t.

Do you really believe this beautiful planet earth, that includes nature, eco system,* law of physics, gravity,* even wavelength so you can enjoy wireless and on and on and on just came out nowhere after some asteroid collision?

Then where did that asteroid come from? [I have this covered. Where did God come from? Of course. No need to state the obvious. Thanks. =D]

You’ll probably say “well the study is still going on and we haven’t found an answer yet”.

You can say that all you want but unless you put God into that equation it’s just an absurd non-sense and they’ll never find that answer.*

It takes bigger leap of faith NOT to believe in God.*

Do you think other scientists, physicist, chemists, biologists whose way way way* more smarter than you and more educated, also doctors, engineers, even the president of U.S believe in God and creation because they’ve never heard of some hominid fossils and seen other ‘supposed’ evidence presented by evolutionists?

If human evolution is true, why do humans have freewill but chimps dont?* Why do humans have morals and conscience but they don’t?* Why do humans emphasize so much in meaning of life but animals can’t?* Why are humans profoundly distressed by death? Where is scientific answer to that?

These are the things science can't answer but bible can.

But you know what?* It’s your life and you can believe in whatever you want.* That’s whats great about being human, that we have freewill unlike animals with instinct.

:facepalm:

 

[NMSquirrel]

??
already read that saturn..
least you could do is add an 'I agree' to the end of that post..

 

[Aqueous Id]

(oops)

 

[wynn]

How do you explain all the perfectly sane people who do not believe they are designed and without purpose?

One thing is what people believe in their privacy, and/or the beliefs they hold but are barely aware of.

Another thing is what they state when challenged and pressured.

 

[Balerion]

One thing is what people believe in their privacy, and/or the beliefs they hold but are barely aware of.

Another thing is what they state when challenged and pressured.

This is not an answer. What are you trying to imply here? That everybody really believes they're created?

I shouldn't have to pry this out of you.

 

[wynn]

It really is no mystery.

People act as if they had a purpose, as if there was a purpose to their lives, they do so all the time.

 

[Balerion]

It really is no mystery.

People act as if they had a purpose, as if there was a purpose to their lives, they do so all the time.

That is different than what you said, which is that people believe they are created and with purpose. Someone finding a purpose in life does not equate to being the divine creation of a deity who has mapped out a plan for you.

 

[wynn]

Go have some ice cream or something else you really really like.

 

[Saturnine Pariah]

??
already read that saturn..
least you could do is add an 'I agree' to the end of that post..

I inserted a :facepalm: picture to show how i felt about garbonzo's post. I cannot belive i actually read that.

 

[Sarkus]

We would go crazy if we wouldn't think we are somehow designed and with a purpose.

You seriously think this?
Or are you including natural evolution somehow as "design" (by natural methods)?

I assure you, I do not think I am somehow "designed" by anything other than evolution, and I certainly don't think I have any purpose than I create for myself (based on my nature and nurture).

But then maybe you consider me mad?

 

[Balerion]

Go have some ice cream or something else you really really like.

So I take this to mean you can't answer the question? :shrug:

 

[wynn]

You seriously think this?
Or are you including natural evolution somehow as "design" (by natural methods)?

Sure. Some people, such as yourself, believe in that kind of design.

Bottomline, everyone who is not mad believes in some kind of design.