It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Intelligent Design HAS to be wrong...

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 29 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: OhOkYeah
If intelligent design were real, we'd have 3 brains and 45 arms and 45 legs.

Actually, 45 brains.

Actually, you wouldn't exist and neither would I. There'd just be a gigantic person with 7 billion brains, 14 billion arms and 14 billion legs.

This type of logic doesn't really lead anywhere. It also doesn't disprove intelligent design.


Well, so far we have about 7 billion brains.




posted on May, 29 2015 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: taoistguy

Some people could have 14 arms and they would complain that they couldn't carry 15 different things simultaneously.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Lol. Average athiest "argument", not surprising.

Athiests tend to be mentally blunted and limited in scope/understanding. Again, a thread like this comes as no surprise.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: DiggerDogg
Lol. Average athiest "argument", not surprising.

Athiests tend to be mentally blunted and limited in scope/understanding. Again, a thread like this comes as no surprise.


Why do you think I am an atheist?



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: DiggerDogg
Lol. Average athiest "argument", not surprising.

Athiests tend to be mentally blunted and limited in scope/understanding. Again, a thread like this comes as no surprise.

I don't believe the OP ever claimed to be an atheist. How about we hear your argument for intelligent design?



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: taoistguy
If design was intelligent, then we would have 2 pairs of hands (and arms.)Just 1 pair is not enough as we have so many things to do and carry, and this has been the case throughout history. Ergo, intelligent design is incorrect.

Why only one pair of hands instead of two? It was a union job.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Nature is fractal....no intelligence needed. Everything relates back to fractals.....



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: taoistguy
If design was intelligent, then we would have 2 pairs of hands (and arms.)Just 1 pair is not enough as we have so many things to do and carry, and this has been the case throughout history. Ergo, intelligent design is incorrect.

Why only one pair of hands instead of two? It was a union job.


I don't understand.


edit on 29-5-2015 by taoistguy because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Nature is fractal....no intelligence needed. Everything relates back to fractals.....



But where do fractals come from? How does that mechanism/process work?



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: taoistguy
I don't understamd.

They're going to do the absolute minimum to fulfill the job requirements.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: taoistguy
I don't understamd.

They're going to do the absolute minimum to fulfill the job requirements.


Oh. Well at least they gave us weekends and lunch breaks.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
How about we hear your argument for intelligent design?

My vague, unprovable argument for intelligent design comes from a loose mix of quantum physics, remote viewing and morphic resonance. Basically, thoughts are energy that have an overlying structure. You can imagine an apple and visualize it in your mind, and while it isn't exactly "physical," it absolutely has a physical component manifested as electrochemical patterns in your brain. Various scientists have postulated a quantum component to thought and consciousness, while others have also indicated that quantum activity is essentially "transtemporal." Time means nothing to quantum interactions, so "now" might just as well be 14 billion years ago.

So what if the ongoing creation of the universe, including the various form and structures we perceive, are a kind of reverse-time manifestation of our own thoughts? That would basically mean that every conscious, living thing in the universe is reaching forward and backward in time, making things happen, giving specific form and substance to reality?

This satisfies the Creationist desire for an "intelligence," but unfortunately for them does away with the need for "God." Instead of God, we have every tiny little cell in every living thing constantly cooking up the universe.
edit on 29-5-2015 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
How about we hear your argument for intelligent design?

My vague, unprovable argument for intelligent design comes from a loose mix of quantum physics, remote viewing and morphic resonance. Basically, thoughts are energy that have an overlying structure. You can imagine an apple and visualize it in your mind, and while it isn't exactly "physical," it absolutely has a physical component manifested as electrochemical patterns in your brain. Various scientists have postulated a quantum component to thought and consciousness, while others have also indicated that quantum activity is essentially "transtemporal." Time means nothing to quantum interactions, so "now" might just as well be 14 billion years ago.

So what if the ongoing creation of the universe, including the various form and structures we perceive, are a kind of reverse-time manifestation of our own thoughts? That would basically mean that every conscious, living thing in the universe is reaching forward and backward in time, making things happen, giving specific form and substance to reality?

This satisfies the Creationist desire for an "intelligence," but unfortunately for them does away with the need for "God." Instead of God, we have every tiny little cell in every living thing constantly cooking up the universe.


I like the theory, but it brings us back to, the chicken or the egg pronlem.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: taoistguy

originally posted by: Blue Shift

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
How about we hear your argument for intelligent design?

My vague, unprovable argument for intelligent design comes from a loose mix of quantum physics, remote viewing and morphic resonance. Basically, thoughts are energy that have an overlying structure. You can imagine an apple and visualize it in your mind, and while it isn't exactly "physical," it absolutely has a physical component manifested as electrochemical patterns in your brain. Various scientists have postulated a quantum component to thought and consciousness, while others have also indicated that quantum activity is essentially "transtemporal." Time means nothing to quantum interactions, so "now" might just as well be 14 billion years ago.

So what if the ongoing creation of the universe, including the various form and structures we perceive, are a kind of reverse-time manifestation of our own thoughts? That would basically mean that every conscious, living thing in the universe is reaching forward and backward in time, making things happen, giving specific form and substance to reality?

This satisfies the Creationist desire for an "intelligence," but unfortunately for them does away with the need for "God." Instead of God, we have every tiny little cell in every living thing constantly cooking up the universe.


I like the theory, but it brings us back to, the chicken or the egg pronlem.



Unless that is solved by some sort of entanglement with the 'then' and 'now'?



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Blue Shift

Star for originality. That's certainly not the answer I was expecting, though I do see several issues with it, first and foremost being: If we are "reaching forward and backwards in time", essentially creating everything in the process, how did "we" end up in the "present" in the first place, to be able to do so? If we are in effect creating the past, then where did we come from?



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: taoistguy
If design was intelligent, then we would have 2 pairs of hands (and arms.)Just 1 pair is not enough as we have so many things to do and carry, and this has been the case throughout history. Ergo, intelligent design isincorrect.



Hahahaha. ..

I was expecting an actual OP with some kind of in depth relation to your conclusion.

Hands!?

You HAS to be wrong sir!



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: taoistguy
I like the theory, but it brings us back to, the chicken or the egg pronlem.

That's because like most folks you're too hung up on the mistaken perception that time is linear. It just seems that way to us, because we don't have the ability to step back and see the whole picture. In the grander scale of the universe, time doesn't flow like a river. There is only "now," and this now was the same now it was two weeks ago, or 10 billion years ago. So it's perfectly reasonable, although non-intuitive, that an action (some kind of energy transfer, possibly even something as small as a thought) 5 billion years in the future can have a reaction 10 billion years ago in the past.

We tend to think in terms of beginnings and endings, but reality is apparently more like the constant swirl you see in a milkshake blender. Mass/energy constantly being recycled through an unknown number of dimensions. Our tiny brains try to make sense of it during our brief existence, but we're really not very good at it.




posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Elementalist

originally posted by: taoistguy
If design was intelligent, then we would have 2 pairs of hands (and arms.)Just 1 pair is not enough as we have so many things to do and carry, and this has been the case throughout history. Ergo, intelligent design isincorrect.



Hahahaha. ..

I was expecting an actual OP with some kind of in depth relation to your conclusion.

Hands!?

You HAS to be wrong sir!


I beg to disagree; arms and hands are very complex and so this conundrum is very deep.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: LittleByLittle
Just because everything can be seen as energy controlled by a quantum field (synchronicity field) that decides the energy forms that can be stable (that we see as particles protons, electrons) do not mean a being cannot control the field (controlling fate on what can be manifested/what form the energy will take).

You can have theories of Intelligent design that are 100% compatible with current scientific observation of entanglement and double slit experiment and evolution getting controlled by the quantum field creating mutation thru quantum tunneling by grand design.



Just because the Fundamental Christian version of Intelligent design seem small minded do not mean all theories of Intelligent design are small minded.

Namaste

Several Quantum physicists of today have predicted in their models that by the time they "boil it all down to basics" they may find intelligent design at the very base level.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
As much as I disagree with the notion of intelligent design, which is just creationism rebranded & whored up with a lab coat, this has to be one of the weakest arguments against an inherently indefensible position that I've ever seen.



new topics




 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join