Intelligent Design

[Mr. 5020]

And yet that test has been conducted many times. Throughtout human history, societies that had no contact with the bible or Christianity had many different explanations for the creation of the earth. Why don't they follow the biblical account exactly?

Ah, but your test was between Creationism and Evolution, and by your admission all of the "societies that had no contact with the bible or Christianity had many different explanations for THE CREATION OF THE EARTH."

The world was there for them to see. They should have been surrounded by evidence of God's method of creation, right?

That's not what your test said. Your test said that none of them would believe in a young earth, which most of them do.

You believe in Creationism because that's what the bible says happened. If tomorrow there was evidence found that completely disproved evolution, I could accept that. Could you accept it if Creationism were proved wrong? No, don't answer. I already know what you would do because you've already done it. You'd cling to the biblical account of creation even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

That's ridiculous. Many people on here have said that if the Bible was proven false, we would abandon our faith. Not everybody, but most did.

 

[Johnny]

Why are you subsituting the would "design" with "pattern"?

Because you're using pattern recognition to infer human design.

There are a myriad of problems with that analogy. Just because something is organized doesn't mean it was designed. Hurricanes are organized. Ice crystals and snowflakes are organized. Yet they have completely natural origins.

 

[fool]

So are you saying that only Christians believe in creationism??

Hindus got their own version. lotsa people got their version.
dating creation

 

[Mr. 5020]

In the biblical account, yes. Other beliefs have their own versions. Only science seems capable of looking at the evidence and deciding what's most likely to be true.

No system built entirely on faith can find the truth.

What about Muslims?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

You would be making an argument from ignorance if you posited that it could only come from humans.

DPOTD :first:

 

[fool]

:rotfl:

That all you got?
ever seen a birds nest? or a beaver dam?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

That all you got?
ever seen a birds nest? or a beaver dam?

Ever see a bird or a beaver build a camp fire?

 

[fool]

DPOTD :first:

I see you put that in a forum I can't post in.
What's a matter? chicken?
Bwaaacck bwaaaaaack, bwaaaack bwaaaaaaack.

 

[Johnny]

Ever see a bird or a beaver build a camp fire?

That's the sound of fool's point going right over Knight's head. Feh.

I found this quote from the article interesting:

In contrast, the theory of intelligent design holds that there are telltale features of living systems and the universe that are best explained by a designing intelligence. The theory does not challenge the idea of evolution defined as change over time, or even common ancestry, but it does dispute Darwin's idea that the cause of biological change is wholly blind and undirected.

You agree with that Bob b?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

I see you put that in a forum I can't post in.
What's a matter? chicken?
Bwaaacck bwaaaaaack, bwaaaack bwaaaaaaack.

You can respond in this forum can't you?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

That's the sound of fool's point going right over Knight's head. Feh.

Johnny YES or NO...

If you came across the camp fire I have described would you think a bird or beaver may have built it?

 

[fool]

Ever see a bird or a beaver build a camp fire?

Birds nests make excellent fire startes, a large one turned upside down might confuse the simple minded., Likewise beaver dams are neatly interwoven mounds, should you see one and not know about beavers you might be puzzled. Also, have you ever seen the stumps left by a beaver that has felled a tree? You might conclude that a man was making a punji stick obstacle course. Ant hills? Snowflakes? balanced rocks? are they all the handiwork of man??

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Birds nests make excellent fire startes, a large one turned upside down might confuse the simple minded., Likewise beaver dams are neatly interwoven mounds, should you see one and not know about beavers you might be puzzled. Also, have you ever seen the stumps left by a beaver that has felled a tree? You might conclude that a man was making a punji stick obstacle course. Ant hills? Snowflakes? balanced rocks? are they all the handiwork of man??

fool, first off animals are intelligent and created by God!

So your argument is self defeating.

But more importantly... just answer the simple question...

fool YES or NO...

If you came across the camp fire I have described would you think a bird or beaver may have built it?

 

[`Love.]

I agree, fool, who needs logic?! :hammer:

Maybe the well-built camp fire was slowly created by a soup-like substance composed of small enzymes that was left over from the big bang. That stuff is like magic powder. It could become anything!!!

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Also, have you ever seen the stumps left by a beaver that has felled a tree? You might conclude that a man was making a punji stick obstacle course.

You might!

But you wouldn't conclude that the tree stump was created without some form of intelligent life chopping it down.

Would you at least concede that point?

 

[Johnny]

If you came across the camp fire I have described would you think a bird or beaver may have built it?

No.

And once again you show that you possess the critical thinking ability of a child. Fool's point wasn't that a bird may have built a campfire with stones around it. It was that you can't always infer "intelligent" design from order. That was my point too. You assume a campfire was probably built by humans because humans build campfires and animals don't and the wind doesn't usually blow them together.

But snowflakes have order. So do hurricanes. Why don't you assume they were designed?

 

[Nathon Detroit]

And once again you show that you possess the critical thinking ability of a child. Fool's point wasn't that a bird may have built a campfire with stones around it. It was that you can't always infer "intelligent" design from order. That was my point too. You assume a campfire was probably built by humans because humans build campfires and animals don't and the wind doesn't usually blow them together.

BINGO!

So, it takes two pages of posts to concede a point you should have conceded initially. Let's see if fool does likewise.

 

[Johnny]

What? I didn't concede anything. My point has always been that's not an argument from ignorance. Fool may disagree, but that's always been my point

And again it goes straight over your head. I'm convinced one must master this kind of ignorance to remain a creationist.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

What? I didn't concede anything.

When you agreed that you wouldn't think a bird or beaver created the camp fire you were conceding that you wouldn't think a bird or beaver could create a camp fire. :hammer:

 

[Mr. 5020]

But snowflakes have order. So do hurricanes. Why don't you assume they were designed?

Who says they weren't designed?