Evidence for Design

Status
Not open for further replies.

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
32,795
36,090
Los Angeles Area
✟820,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
I am unsure why you can't understand the argument,

Because it doesn't make any sense.

If you want to say that the human body is designed, you would want to show what it has in common with things that we know are designed. Instead, you focus on things that living things do, that no designed things do. Why should I think living things are designed, when all you point to are the differences between living things and designed things?
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Because it doesn't make any sense.

If you want to say that the human body is designed, you would want to show what it has in common with things that we know are designed. Instead, you focus on things that living things do, that no designed things do. Why should I think living things are designed, when all you point to are the differences between living things and designed things?

designed thing = machines

does that make sense now?
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I think it might be that a determination of what is inappropriate content, especially soft core inappropriate content, is often in the (dirty) mind of the beholder. Old pin-up posters are considered to be art. Song of Songs is Biblical canon. Just because some people can use almost anything as fantasy fodder, does not make them automatically inappropriate content.

so I take it scantily clad women are your thing?
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Just because something is designed doesn't mean it's a machine.

you still haven't answered the question.

why is it that we have no machines that are capable of self replication, self diagnosis and self repair while the typical human body does it?

btw, I have been meaning to ask you, are you a christian?
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Some of the most famous pictures and sculptures in the world are 'scantily clad women'.

yeah classic art is another story, we have to put up with their nakedness, but no one elses.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes: you're pointing out that humans are very unlike machines.

does twisting what I am saying get you out of answering a question?

is this your tactic to commit a red herring to avoid responsibility?

do you do this alot?
 
Upvote 0

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟31,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
does twisting what I am saying get you out of answering a question?

is this your tactic to commit a red herring to avoid responsibility?

do you do this alot?
You are saying that humans contain designed engineering beyond any machine.

Now you're saying that design = machines.

So if humans are so very unlike machines, then they must be very unlike design.

Which is my point: human complexity is the result of generations of trial-and-error (aka, evolution by natural selection), while modern machinery is the result of forethought and planning.

Case in point: the wheel. Evolution cannot produce a wheel, hence why it doesn't exist in any animals gross anatomy. The wheel is an artefact of engineering, that has existed since humans first put their mind to the most rudimentary of engineering. Yet natural organisms, which are supposed to have been designed by a being of infinite intelligence, contain glaring blunders - inefficient locomotion, inefficient eyes (backwards retina? really?), the vertical spine (no engineer would design human organs to hang horizontally off a vertical spine composed of vertically stacked discs, yet this is exactly what we'd expect from a quadruped that became a biped).

My remark, then, was to tacitly point out that you're inadvertently proving our point: humans are complex, but that complexity belies evolution, not design. We are riddled with features that scream "Adaptation!", not "Omniscient foresight!". To quote the man himself:
"We must, however, acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system — with all these exalted powers — Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin." - Charles Darwin, 1874, The Descent of Man, 2nd Ed, p 619.
 
Upvote 0

Justatruthseeker

Newbie
Supporter
Jun 4, 2013
10,132
996
Tulsa, OK USA
✟155,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Widowed
Politics
US-Others
I didnt see a thread specifically relating to this so here I go (havent posted here before).

I am just wondering, what evidence (not counting The Bible or any holy scripture) that brings about the conclusion that everything (world, universe, us, etc) is designed. Or is it more an assumption that it is designed because its complicated?


The simpler question to answer would of been what evidence points to no design? Nothing.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You are saying that humans contain designed engineering beyond any machine.

Now you're saying that design = machines.

So if humans are so very unlike machines, then they must be very unlike design.

Which is my point: human complexity is the result of generations of trial-and-error (aka, evolution by natural selection), while modern machinery is the result of forethought and planning.

Case in point: the wheel. Evolution cannot produce a wheel, hence why it doesn't exist in any animals gross anatomy. The wheel is an artefact of engineering, that has existed since humans first put their mind to the most rudimentary of engineering. Yet natural organisms, which are supposed to have been designed by a being of infinite intelligence, contain glaring blunders - inefficient locomotion, inefficient eyes (backwards retina? really?), the vertical spine (no engineer would design human organs to hang horizontally off a vertical spine composed of vertically stacked discs, yet this is exactly what we'd expect from a quadruped that became a biped).

My remark, then, was to tacitly point out that you're inadvertently proving our point: humans are complex, but that complexity belies evolution, not design. We are riddled with features that scream "Adaptation!", not "Omniscient foresight!". To quote the man himself:
"We must, however, acknowledge, as it seems to me, that man with all his noble qualities, with sympathy which feels for the most debased, with benevolence which extends not only to other men but to the humblest living creature, with his god-like intellect which has penetrated into the movements and constitution of the solar system — with all these exalted powers — Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin." - Charles Darwin, 1874, The Descent of Man, 2nd Ed, p 619.

so when I ask you the question you have no answer?

that is what I thought.

but you can keep talking, we are enjoying this.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Wiccan_Child

Contributor
Mar 21, 2005
19,419
673
Bristol, UK
✟31,731.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
so when I ask you the question you have no answer?
Err... I gave quite a thorough answer :scratch:. I explained in detail what I meant by my remark: it's not the red herring you thought it was, it was a rhetorical device to get you to realise that you're not making the point you think you are. You are simultaneously comparing humans to machines (both are designed), and putting humans far above machines (machines don't even compare to God's design).

Unless you're referring to some other question I missed? It really would help if you were more clear about what you're talking about.
 
Upvote 0

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
32,795
36,090
Los Angeles Area
✟820,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
designed thing = machines

does that make sense now?

Perfect sense, in that it proves my point.

You claim that the human body is not like a machine.
You claim that machines are designed things.
Therefore the human body is not like a designed thing.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Perfect sense, in that it proves my point.

You claim that the human body is not like a machine.
You claim that machines are designed things.
Therefore the human body is not like a designed thing.

the human body is more than a machine.

because no machine we have is like it.

therefore it is designed because it has everything our machines have and more,

wow I can't believe you made me spell it out for you.
 
Upvote 0

createdtoworship

In the grip of grace
Mar 13, 2004
18,941
1,758
West Coast USA
✟33,173.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Err... I gave quite a thorough answer :scratch:. I explained in detail what I meant by my remark: it's not the red herring you thought it was, it was a rhetorical device to get you to realise that you're not making the point you think you are. You are simultaneously comparing humans to machines (both are designed), and putting humans far above machines (machines don't even compare to God's design).

Unless you're referring to some other question I missed? It really would help if you were more clear about what you're talking about.

actually you are correct this time, what is the problem with the argument.

I was simply using the term machine to calibrate our senses. But the human body like you said is much more than a machine, therefore since

M=D

then

H+M= equals more than D

M=machine
H=human
D=design
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

essentialsaltes

Stranger in a Strange Land
Oct 17, 2011
32,795
36,090
Los Angeles Area
✟820,157.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Legal Union (Other)
the human body is more than a machine.

because no machine we have is like it.

therefore it is designed because it has everything our machines have and more,

wow I can't believe you made me spell it out for you.

Mount Everest is more than a pyramid.

No structure we've built is like it.

Therefore Mount Everest is designed because it has everything our architecture has and more.

I'm afraid I'm not in the least persuaded.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.