Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Intelligent Design Is Just As Valid A Theory As Evolutionism

page: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:22 AM
link   


Just because you can't understand the designer or higher power doesn't mean that there wasn't one initially.


Just because we lack knowledge for all the underlying principle's of the universe and life itself doesn't mean there was a designer.




It is good that some in the scientific community strive to improve upon their understanding and don't stay with antiquated ideas, don't you think?


The idea of a designer IS antiquated. Goes way back into ancient history, right along side with the belief in a god or gods.




The likelihood of matter - much less consciousness - springing into being through pure chance in a void of space, WITHOUT an Intelligent Designer of some kind, is astronomically small


Based upon what variables? One planet and one species developing a higher form of intelligence? .... Doesn't seem like a very scientific calculation to me. We don't know all the condition's as of yet, nor the amount of life bearing planets in the entire universe. So, no, it's far from logical to conclude that one example speaks for the entire universe.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
The likelihood of matter - much less consciousness

Bacteria are concious now?


- springing into being through pure chance in a void of space, WITHOUT an Intelligent Designer of some kind, is astronomically small



Astronomically small.. compared to what? You don't have any data so you have no idea what the 'chances' are.. of course you were insisting it was mathematics before yet you didn't provide the anything to back this up [number of inhospital planets in our universe]. Matter and energy are also the same thing [Einstein] so speculating on the likelihood of matter appearing by itself is silly.. they are interchangable. Wouldn't a 'higher power' qualify as an energy? Think about that before you start saying 'in the begginning'.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Mathematics, astronomy and radio astronomy, all point to the Universe not being infinite at all, just extremely large. So your premise falls apart.


Originally posted by riley
How? Your idea is like assuming a truck full of organically freshly picked fruit couldn't possibly have a bug on it.

Sure...but only if there was no insects where the fruit was grown and harvested.


Originally posted by riley
We don't even know if Mars has had life on it.. or europa.

We don't need to know, as we have life here.

Oh...and by the way, they have found evidence of microscopic life on Mars.


Originally posted by riley
Also.. the universe probably consists of more than one universe [Steven Hawkins].. ours could be the tip of the iceburg.

I am open to the possibility of more than one Intelligent Designer in more than one Universe; if not now, then in the future.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Whether it is a small Universe or a large one does not mean that there was not an Intelligent Designer that started it.


Originally posted by riley
It does not mean there is. Your maths hasn't proven anything. Where was this designer?

Think of it as likened to finding a big city that is uninhabited. Just because you can't find the builders does not mean that they didn't exist. Quite the contrary, by all reasonable estimates, either the builders are no longer around or they are not accessible at present. Either way the very existence of a city still points to someone having designed it and built it. Cities do not just suddenly emerge from nothingness.

Do you know of one that has?


Originally posted by riley
Existing outside time and space? Notice the word 'existence'.. E=mc2; you need time and space to do that.

Alas, you are trying to fit your conception of the energies/forces which existed prior to The Big Bang into your paradigm of scientific understanding and having a very difficult time in doing so. The reason is because your equation cannot explain what happened seconds before The Big Bang was manifested.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
To have ANYTHING come about through PURE CHANCE is very small. To have LIFE come about ANYWHERE through PURE CHANCE, is infinitesimally small.


Originally posted by riley
Incorrect- there is no such thing as 'pure chance' but unsentimental action and reaction which are part of ongoing processes. If you would like to know more look up 'Fractel theory'.

That's FRACTAL.


In order to have a REACTION of Creation, there first has to be an ACTION. Actions do not occur spontaneously in a void of space. They must be directed by a personality, consciousness, or...ahem...a higher power.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Thus, logically, a higher power must have been involved.



Originally posted by riley
Must? this assumption is not logical at all. If you feel more comfortable feeling like everything that happens has meaning.. good for you.

God does not play dice with the Universe. -- Albert Einstein

I side with Albert on this issue.



Originally posted by riley
Logically though everything that happens is merely the consequence of a previous event.. there is no reason to assume the chance of life occuring is any less likely than anything else in the universe given the right conditions.

Bingo.

The "right conditions."

The right conditions for matter and energy - much less life - to emerge do not spring from a void of space without a willful act of an intelligence of some kind.

You could of course prove me wrong on this issue by proving it scientifically. Have something emerge in a void of space without gravity, gases, light, bacteria, sound, or any willful act from you or anyone else.

Good luck.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:58 AM
link   
skep,

DENY IGNORANCE.

You are apparently a Kool-Aid drinker.

Your prejudice, illogic and ignorance is too far gone for me to even bother addressing.

There has to be some intelligence behind a post for me to find the motivation to reply.

I have yet to find any in yours.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Just because we lack knowledge for all the underlying principle's of the universe and life itself doesn't mean there was a designer.

Oh yes it does


Because you can't have matter and energy - much less life - emerge from nothingness without an Intelligent Designer or higher power of some kind.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
It is good that some in the scientific community strive to improve upon their understanding and don't stay with antiquated ideas, don't you think?


Originally posted by Produkt
The idea of a designer IS antiquated. Goes way back into ancient history, right along side with the belief in a god or gods.


I suppose that a Universe springing into being through pure chance is your idea of a modern theory?




That reminds me of an idea that I learned many years ago...

"When science has finally climbed the mountain of knowledge, it will find religion there, having waited all along."

Can't take credit for the above quote but I do find that some of the ancient ideas and technologies to be much more insightful - and in some cases much more brilliant - than many now would like to admit. It is all a matter of research and objective analysis.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
The likelihood of matter - much less consciousness - springing into being through pure chance in a void of space, WITHOUT an Intelligent Designer of some kind, is astronomically small


Originally posted by Produkt
Based upon what variables?

Based on the logical argument that you can't have matter and energy - much less life - emerge from nothingness without an Intelligent Designer or higher power of some kind having initiated it.

Again, I am open to scientific evidence to prove you are right. Get that vacuum of space to produce something without any help from you or anyone else, and void of gases, bacteria, light and sound.

That is why the "Universe just popped into existence" idea falls by the wayside. It doesn't hold up to cold logic.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
The likelihood of matter - much less consciousness



Originally posted by riley
Bacteria are concious now?


H-E-L-L-O?

Where do I state that bacteria is conscious?

But it does represent the building blocks of other forms of life, some of which may indeed be conscious.

You are aware that there are different variations of life...right?


- springing into being through pure chance in a void of space, WITHOUT an Intelligent Designer of some kind, is astronomically small





Originally posted by riley


Astronomically small.. compared to what?


Astronomically small when compared to the possibility of matter, energy and life springing into being - in a highly ordered fashion no less.


Originally posted by riley
You don't have any data so you have no idea what the 'chances' are.. of course you were insisting it was mathematics before yet you didn't provide the anything to back this up [number of inhospital planets in our universe]. [


Still sore from being wrong about the Universe not being infinite I see.


All we need to have is life on one planet to prove that there was an Intelligent Designer. We have it here.


Originally posted by riley
Matter and energy are also the same thing [Einstein] so speculating on the likelihood of matter appearing by itself is silly.. they are interchangable.


Yes, it is quite silly to think that matter and energy - and LIFE - can appear by itself.


Old Al was quite right about that.



Originally posted by riley
Wouldn't a 'higher power' qualify as an energy? Think about that before you start saying 'in the begginning'.


In the beginning...


So you want to indirectly get on the topic of the Intelligent Designer.

Does consciousness have energy of a kind?

Yes.

Does that energy fit into the current paradigm of scientific thought?

Not really.

In some cases perhaps among the more enlightened scientists but as a whole it doesn't because it cannot be understood through traditional physics and the equations thereof.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 11:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard

Originally posted by riley
How? Your idea is like assuming a truck full of organically freshly picked fruit couldn't possibly have a bug on it.

Sure...but only if there was no insects where the fruit was grown and harvested.

Impossible in the natural world.


Originally posted by riley
We don't even know if Mars has had life on it.. or europa.

We don't need to know, as we have life here.

Oh...and by the way, they have found evidence of microscopic life on Mars.

Indeed. This would suggest that life is not are rare thing in the universe. It's not even rare in our solar system.

I am open to the possibility of more than one Intelligent Designer in more than one Universe; if not now, then in the future.

Where would these intelligent designers live?

Think of it as likened to finding a big city that is uninhabited. Just because you can't find the builders does not mean that they didn't exist. Quite the contrary, by all reasonable estimates, either the builders are no longer around or they are not accessible at present. Either way the very existence of a city still points to someone having designed it and built it. Cities do not just suddenly emerge from nothingness.

Buildings and life forms are not the same thing.. I understand the reasoning but it is exactly the limitations of the human mind that some think things must have a creator as everything we create [aside from life] has to be thought up. Nature does not need to rationalise things like we do.. the fact that some think they have to personify nature just shows how self involved as a species we really are.

Alas, you are trying to fit your conception of the energies/forces which existed prior to The Big Bang into your paradigm of scientific understanding and having a very difficult time in doing so. The reason is because your equation cannot explain what happened seconds before The Big Bang was manifested.

Give me time.

Obviously they arose from somewhere.. but to assume someone does not make any sense as where would this sentient being reside if not in some form of space? Energy requires it.

That's FRACTAL.

You are diving on typos now? Thats pathetic.

In order to have a REACTION of Creation, there first has to be an ACTION. Actions do not occur spontaneously in a void of space.

'Void' is your opinion. I do not believe in 'nothing'.

They must be directed by a personality, consciousness, or...ahem...a higher power.

There is no 'must'. That is just your belief.. it is not a scientific fact. I'd also like to know exactly how this personality came into being? You assume everything needs a builder.. by that logic everyone has parents.. including a god.


Originally posted by riley
Must? this assumption is not logical at all. If you feel more comfortable feeling like everything that happens has meaning.. good for you.

God does not play dice with the Universe. -- Albert Einstein

I side with Albert on this issue.

I've seen a fair few Einstein quotes.. many taken out of context. The man was indeed agnostic.. care to actually argue his equations instead of posting quotes that are completely unrelated to the topic?

Bingo.

The "right conditions."

The right conditions for matter and energy - much less life - to emerge do not spring from a void of space without a willful act of an intelligence of some kind.

There are millions of gallaxies with millions of suns and billions of planets. The 'chances' are pretty good that some will be alligned in the 'correct' positions to create life.. a rough estimate of the top of my head would be thousands of 'living' planets. The scientists agree with me. I said this before.. others have said this before.. why do you keep ignoring this point and insisting it's rare?

You could of course prove me wrong on this issue by proving it scientifically. Have something emerge in a void of space without gravity, gases, light, bacteria, sound, or any willful act from you or anyone else.


That would be dark matter.
-----

H-E-L-L-O?

Where do I state that bacteria is conscious?

But it does represent the building blocks of other forms of life, some of which may indeed be conscious.

You are aware that there are different variations of life...right?

I would appreciate if you adopted a more respectful tone. Your continued assertion has been that ALL LIFE needs are creator regardless of conciousness. Bacteria and other single celled organisms are quite capable of evolving over millions of years into concious beings.. WE most probably evolved from single cell.. along with everything else on this planet. Have you now changed your stance to only 'concious life' needs a 'divine creator' and not bacteria?

Astronomically small when compared to the possibility of matter, energy and life springing into being - in a highly ordered fashion no less.

EVERYTHING in the universe has a 'highly ordered fashion' from our persective. Again you fail to back up your claims of what is possible and what is not.. you seem to base you entire argument on how important our existince is within the universe.. as though it was created 'just for us'. Kind of like how the sun revolves around the earth..


Still sore from being wrong about the Universe not being infinite I see.

No. I believe in the 'multi-universe' theory.. and it was not the question I asked. I wanted to know about all thes inhospitable planets in need of gods magic touch you seem to know about.

All we need to have is life on one planet to prove that there was an Intelligent Designer. We have it here.

All that proves is that you believe in god and that life exists on this planet.. it doesn't prove god exists.


Originally posted by riley
Matter and energy are also the same thing [Einstein] so speculating on the likelihood of matter appearing by itself is silly.. they are interchangable.


Yes, it is quite silly to think that matter and energy - and LIFE - can appear by itself.

You avoided the question by trying to deflect it.. and I notice you use capitals to highlight 'life' because for some reason you consider it more significant than other chemical reactions or processes. Even though I am glad to be alive.. it's impressiveness does not make us more 'special' in relation to the rest of the universe.. and I do not think the big bang hapened by itself.. it was a reaction to something preceeding it. Do you believe clouds make a concious decision to rain? Do planets and moons decide to move rather than just being in an orbit? Does Haileys' comet do a flyby every seventy odd years for the attention? You seem to 'need' things to be 'god's will' that is fine but it is not proven scientific fact.

In some cases perhaps among the more enlightened scientists but as a whole it doesn't because it cannot be understood through traditional physics and the equations thereof.

So just in case it doesn't exist and is therefore undetectable.. you can always turn around and say it's the fault of the testing methods. Convenient.

[edit on 4-3-2006 by riley]



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   


Because you can't have matter and energy - much less life - emerge from nothingness without an Intelligent Designer or higher power of some kind.


No... No it doesn't. That's assuming you KNOW what the condition's were prior to the birth of the universe. Which you DON'T. So, no, lack of that knowledge in no way suggest's a designer.




I suppose that a Universe springing into being through pure chance is your idea of a modern theory?


The current theories are modern. Can you find any refrence's to quantum physics or M-Teory or string theory 6,000 years ago? Yea ... thought so.




Based on the logical argument that you can't have matter and energy - much less life - emerge from nothingness without an Intelligent Designer or higher power of some kind having initiated it.


Again, flawed logic. We do not know the conditions of what ever predated the universe, so in no way can we logicly conclude that it was a designer. Lack of knowledge is not evidence of design.




That is why the "Universe just popped into existence" idea falls by the wayside. It doesn't hold up to cold logic.


It would do you a world of wonder to read up on current theories. Else you wouldn't be saying this.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Paul,

Do you not see the flaw in your logic? Let me ask you; where did the designer/higher power come from? You've been harping about how matter and energy can't come from nothing, so, what about the designer?

And, it is not as valid a theory as evolution. What is the process through which the designer designs. I've been asking the ID supporters this for a minute, but they claim no need to worry about that. Mattison has been carrying on like this, until LeftBehind told him (more eloquently than I did) that we have no idea how to design lifeforms, though we do know how to design things like artifacts. This still has Mattison stumped.
It seems he responds better to my beefin posting style.

Well, Paul, maybe YOU will tell me more about the designer or higher power. Since you say higher power, I'm going to assume that this higher power has 2 alteregos...even though we know what happens when we assume...



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard

Originally posted by riley
How? Your idea is like assuming a truck full of organically freshly picked fruit couldn't possibly have a bug on it.

Sure...but only if there was no insects where the fruit was grown and harvested.


Originally posted by riley
Impossible in the natural world.


That is neither here nor there.



Originally posted by riley
We don't even know if Mars has had life on it.. or europa.



Originally posted by Paul_Richard

We don't need to know, as we have life here.

Oh...and by the way, they have found evidence of microscopic life on Mars.


Originally posted by riley
Indeed. This would suggest that life is not are rare thing in the universe. It's not even rare in our solar system.


I agree with that.


I am open to the possibility of more than one Intelligent Designer in more than one Universe; if not now, then in the future.



Originally posted by riley
Where would these intelligent designers live?


That's like asking where do aliens live.

Going back to the suddenly emerged yet uninhabited city example, he/she/they either exist now or did at one time.


Originally posted by riley
Think of it as likened to finding a big city that is uninhabited. Just because you can't find the builders does not mean that they didn't exist. Quite the contrary, by all reasonable estimates, either the builders are no longer around or they are not accessible at present. Either way the very existence of a city still points to someone having designed it and built it. Cities do not just suddenly emerge from nothingness.



Originally posted by riley
Buildings and life forms are not the same thing.. I understand the reasoning but it is exactly the limitations of the human mind that some think things must have a creator as everything we create [aside from life] has to be thought up. Nature does not need to rationalise things like we do.. the fact that some think they have to personify nature just shows how self involved as a species we really are.


As far as limitations are concerned...speak for yourself.

The city example is a good illustration that whenever you have a highly ordered framework in place, it was orchestrated by an intelligence. It didn't just pop into existence. Someone had to start the program.


Originally posted by riley
Alas, you are trying to fit your conception of the energies/forces which existed prior to The Big Bang into your paradigm of scientific understanding and having a very difficult time in doing so. The reason is because your equation cannot explain what happened seconds before The Big Bang was manifested.



Originally posted by riley
Give me time.


Take as long as you wish.



Originally posted by riley
Obviously they arose from somewhere.. but to assume someone does not make any sense as where would this sentient being reside if not in some form of space? Energy requires it.


Well, let's first take the issue of space itself. I think that you and I both surmise that there are life forms out there. At present we don't know exactly where they are. Same goes for any and all architects of the larger projects.


That's FRACTAL.


Originally posted by riley
You are diving on typos now? Thats pathetic.


If you are going to accuse someone of ignorance, you should at least use the right spelling.



Originally posted by riley
In order to have a REACTION of Creation, there first has to be an ACTION. Actions do not occur spontaneously in a void of space.



Originally posted by riley
'Void' is your opinion. I do not believe in 'nothing'.


The word "void" is synonymous with the vacuum of space.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
They must be directed by a personality, consciousness, or...ahem...a higher power.



Originally posted by riley
There is no 'must'. That is just your belief.. it is not a scientific fact. I'd also like to know exactly how this personality came into being? You assume everything needs a builder.. by that logic everyone has parents.. including a god.


Because you cannot have something come about from nothing. That is not just a belief, it is a fact. Show us evidence that something can pop into existence in the vacuum of space. You cannot. No one can.

I would not assume that parents necessarily had to be involved. That is a Terran-Homo-sapien-humanoid perspective. You make the supposition that the Intelligent Designer had parents and that a birth was involved. I would not make that assumption.



Originally posted by riley
Must? this assumption is not logical at all. If you feel more comfortable feeling like everything that happens has meaning.. good for you.

God does not play dice with the Universe. -- Albert Einstein

I side with Albert on this issue.



Originally posted by riley
I've seen a fair few Einstein quotes.. many taken out of context. The man was indeed agnostic.. care to actually argue his equations instead of posting quotes that are completely unrelated to the topic?


Actually, if you study him closely, Einstein appears to have been more of a Pantheist than an Agnostic.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard

The "right conditions."

The right conditions for matter and energy - much less life - to emerge do not spring from a void of space without a willful act of an intelligence of some kind.



Originally posted by riley
There are millions of gallaxies with millions of suns and billions of planets. The 'chances' are pretty good that some will be alligned in the 'correct' positions to create life.. a rough estimate of the top of my head would be thousands of 'living' planets. The scientists agree with me. I said this before.. others have said this before.. why do you keep ignoring this point and insisting it's rare?


The vastness of the Universe allows for life to be spread out but that does not mean that it is not rare, which it is. For example, most of this solar system is lifeless.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
You could of course prove me wrong on this issue by proving it scientifically. Have something emerge in a void of space without gravity, gases, light, bacteria, sound, or any willful act from you or anyone else.



Originally posted by riley

That would be dark matter.


No, it would not. It would be a vacuum of space. Dark matter is something; it is not representative of nothing.


Originally posted by riley
...Your continued assertion has been that ALL LIFE needs are creator regardless of conciousness.


My assertion is that the Universe of matter, energy and the chemical and environmental processes that has brought about the conditions for life to emerge - in its various forms - was originally orchestrated by an Intelligent Designer billions of years ago.


Originally posted by riley
Bacteria and other single celled organisms are quite capable of evolving over millions of years into concious beings..


That is an interesting theory. I believe it is called Evolutionism.



Originally posted by riley
WE most probably evolved from single cell.. along with everything else on this planet. Have you now changed your stance to only 'concious life' needs a 'divine creator' and not bacteria?


Bacteria and microscopic life in general has its place in supporting humanoid life, to be sure. But I don't agree that we most probably evolved from a single cell.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Astronomically small when compared to the possibility of matter, energy and life springing into being - in a highly ordered fashion no less.



Originally posted by riley
EVERYTHING in the universe has a 'highly ordered fashion' from our persective.


Yes...and that of Einstein.


Originally posted by riley
Again you fail to back up your claims of what is possible and what is not..


The same could be said to you. There are many things which are possible. A Universe popping into existence in a highly ordered fashion without someone or a higher power starting it, doesn't make sense. It isn't logical and it isn't even reasonable. It represents very bad analysis.



Originally posted by riley
you seem to base you entire argument on how important our existince is within the universe..


Not really. If you are right in that there is life throughout the Universe, then the importance of our personal existence is not the key factor, but one of many.


Originally posted by riley
as though it was created 'just for us'. Kind of like how the sun revolves around the earth..


Yes...and every other sun was created for every other humanoid civilization.


Originally posted by riley
I believe in the 'multi-universe' theory.. and it was not the question I asked. I wanted to know about all thes inhospitable planets in need of gods magic touch you seem to know about.


Nope. That's is not what I am espousing. You are pointing to an active Creator in the affairs of humanoid life. I am advocating that there was an Intelligent Designer who started the program; not that one is currently in existence. See the difference?

This is where I and other people (many of which are Deists) who agree with the theory of Intelligent Design, differ from the Creationists.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
All we need to have is life on one planet to prove that there was an Intelligent Designer. We have it here.



Originally posted by riley
All that proves is that you believe in god and that life exists on this planet.. it doesn't prove god exists.


What points to an Intelligent Designer is the mathematical probability that matter, energy and life can emerge from nothingness, from pure chance, as opposed to the much more reasonable supposition that someone - a higher power - started The Big Bang.


Originally posted by riley
Matter and energy are also the same thing [Einstein] so speculating on the likelihood of matter appearing by itself is silly.. they are interchangable.



Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Yes, it is quite silly to think that matter and energy - and LIFE - can appear by itself.



Originally posted by riley
You avoided the question by trying to deflect it.. and I notice you use capitals to highlight 'life' because for some reason you consider it more significant than other chemical reactions or processes.


The reason why I capitalized LIFE is because the required chemicals and processes and environment are much less likely to spring from nothingness than just dead matter and energy. It is all a matter of reasonable probability, derived through observation and logic.


Originally posted by riley
Even though I am glad to be alive.. it's impressiveness does not make us more 'special' in relation to the rest of the universe.. and I do not think the big bang hapened by itself.. it was a reaction to something preceeding it.


What do you think preceded it?


Originally posted by riley
Do you believe clouds make a concious decision to rain? Do planets and moons decide to move rather than just being in an orbit? Does Haileys' comet does a flyby every seventy odd years for the attention? You seem to 'need' things to be 'god's will' that is fine but it is not proven scientific fact.


The above is a combination of polytheism and Pantheism, neither of which I espouse.


Originally posted by riley
In some cases perhaps among the more enlightened scientists but as a whole it doesn't because it cannot be understood through traditional physics and the equations thereof.



Originally posted by riley
So just in case it doesn't exist and is therefore undetectable.. you can always turn around and say it's the fault of the testing methods. Convenient.


Hey, it's not my fault you cannot back up your claims.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:56 PM
link   


Because you cannot have something come about from nothing. That is not just a belief, it is a fact. Show us evidence that something can pop into existence in the vacuum of space. You cannot. No one can.


Then where did the designer/god come from?



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Paul_Richard
Because you can't have matter and energy - much less life - emerge from nothingness without an Intelligent Designer or higher power of some kind.



Originally posted by Produkt
No... No it doesn't. That's assuming you KNOW what the condition's were prior to the birth of the universe. Which you DON'T. So, no, lack of that knowledge in no way suggest's a designer.


One does not have to know the prior conditions of something to know that someone started a project. However, what one does require is the capability to apply deductive and inductive reasoning


For example, when you see a bridge, you do not have to know how it was constructed in order to understand that it was built. Same idea but on a larger scale.


Originally posted by Paul_Richard
I suppose that a Universe springing into being through pure chance is your idea of a modern theory?



Originally posted by Produkt
The current theories are modern. Can you find any refrence's to quantum physics or M-Teory or string theory 6,000 years ago? Yea ... thought so.


Can you prove that the Universe sprang from nothingness and that we all evolved from single-celled organisms?

Yea...thought so.



Originally posted by Produkt
Based on the logical argument that you can't have matter and energy - much less life - emerge from nothingness without an Intelligent Designer or higher power of some kind having initiated it.



Originally posted by Produkt
Again, flawed logic. We do not know the conditions of what ever predated the universe, so in no way can we logicly conclude that it was a designer. Lack of knowledge is not evidence of design.


Well...for those of us who know how to think correctly, we can reason that there was an Intelligent Designer.



Originally posted by Produkt
That is why the "Universe just popped into existence" idea falls by the wayside. It doesn't hold up to cold logic.



Originally posted by Produkt
It would do you a world of wonder to read up on current theories. Else you wouldn't be saying this.


It would do YOU a world of wonder if you took a course in logic and reasoning, and learn how to think outside the box.





posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt



Because you cannot have something come about from nothing. That is not just a belief, it is a fact. Show us evidence that something can pop into existence in the vacuum of space. You cannot. No one can.


Then where did the designer/god come from?


Hey...one thing at a time. That is a whole thread in itself.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:08 PM
link   
Where did the designer/god come from?




Because you cannot have something come about from nothing. That is not just a belief, it is a fact. Show us evidence that something can pop into existence in the vacuum of space. You cannot. No one can.






One does not have to know the prior conditions of something to know that someone started a project. However, what one does require is the capability to apply deductive and inductive reasoning


By this definition, ANYTHING of complex nature must have a designer. Snowflake's, man on the moon, face on mars. Complex patterns occuring naturally in nature. Are you going to go so far as to say all these thing's require a designer?




Can you prove that the Universe sprang from nothingness and that we all evolved from single-celled organisms?


Personally, no I can't. Don't have a degree in the science behind it. But if you'd like I can save you the trouble of looking up the information and go fetch it for you if your willing to learn something.




Well...for those of us who know how to think correctly, we can reason that there was an Intelligent Designer.


LOL ... right ok... Using lack of knowledge as a claim for logical reasoning .. uh... right. Oh how stupid of me


[edit on 4-3-2006 by Produkt]



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:09 PM
link   


First, Paul says that the odds against life appearing ANYWHERE ELSE in the universe are astronomically huge. Then, he himself posts a link about evidence for life on Mars. THEN, when riley says that's the point, life could possibly be not so rare even in our solar system, Paul agrees.



Which is it, Paul?



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
Paul,

Do you not see the flaw in your logic?


No I don't. But I do see a lot of bias and bad analysis.



Originally posted by truthseeka
Let me ask you; where did the designer/higher power come from?


If you can't understand the logic behind there having been one, the point of this discourse is...what?



Originally posted by truthseeka
You've been harping about how matter and energy can't come from nothing, so, what about the designer?


I never stated that the Intelligent Designer came from nothing, only that the observable, highly-ordered Universe did not.



Originally posted by truthseeka
And, it is not as valid a theory as evolution.


I beg to differ. Especially since evolutionary theory has many pitfalls. Not the least of which is that no one has been able to dig up a hominid that holds up to be the missing link to Homo sapien. I don't think that they will ever find that.


Originally posted by truthseeka
What is the process through which the designer designs.


Great question.

Any ideas?


Originally posted by truthseeka
I've been asking the ID supporters this for a minute, but they claim no need to worry about that. Mattison has been carrying on like this, until LeftBehind told him (more eloquently than I did) that we have no idea how to design lifeforms, though we do know how to design things like artifacts. This still has Mattison stumped.
It seems he responds better to my beefin posting style.


This is great!

We have heated Intelligent Design debates going on simultaneously in the ATS forum!

I can hardly contain myself.



The issue of designing life forms is moot if you haven't even gotten to the point of being able to embrace the greater logic that there was an Intelligent Designer in the first place.



Originally posted by truthseeka
Well, Paul, maybe YOU will tell me more about the designer or higher power. Since you say higher power, I'm going to assume that this higher power has 2 alteregos...even though we know what happens when we assume...


No, you may not assume that the higher power has one or two alter egos. I'm not going to jump in at the end of a long debate and advocate that it is Jesus or Krishna or something along those lines.


The nature of and speculation about the Intelligent Designer is best left for another thread.




posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka

First, Paul says that the odds against life appearing ANYWHERE ELSE in the universe are astronomically huge. Then, he himself posts a link about evidence for life on Mars. THEN, when riley says that's the point, life could possibly be not so rare even in our solar system, Paul agrees.

Which is it, Paul?


truthseeka,

Be careful not to misquote me. You do this by directly listing what I stated and not trying to put a spin on it in the process.

Let's set the record straight for those of you who may be confused.

Life appearing anywhere at any time through pure chance is astronomically small in probability; smaller than the emergence of matter and energy that is - for all intents and purposes - dead.

But there is life in the Universe...an abundance of it. That is precisely the point. It could not have come about through pure chance. It had to be orchestrated long ago by an Intelligent Designer.





posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:20 PM
link   
What are you talking about?

Maybe I wasn't clear. We're going to assume for the sake of argument that there is a designer. Now then, answer the questions.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:24 PM
link   
Once again, Paul.

ID makes no reference to a method through which the designer works. ID does not describe the nature of said method. Not on par with evolution here.



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Produkt
Where did the designer/god come from?


That's easy....

designer's all the way down?


The designer created the universe from his own dimension, viola, time and space. Then he 'popped' into existence in this universe from his dimension to seed the first organisms. Then when the first hominids evolved, he used aliens to create the super intelligent species homo sapiens. It obvious and entirely logical....





new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join