Herman Hedning
Hiking is fun
A good guess though, since the Antikythera Mechanism has quite a lot of text written in Greek on it.
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Evolution and the myth of "scientific consensus"
- Thread starter lifepsyop
- Start date
- Status
The Cadet
SO COOL
- Apr 29, 2010
- 6,290
- 4,743
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
And yet, I don't see the design in the bacterial flagellum, any more than I see design in the various rock faces posted earlier. The problem here is overactive pattern recognition.
Upvote
0
Having said that, what evidence shows what is perceived to be designed (natural animate and inanimate objects) by said designer?
Put another way: dog (designed object) <evidence> designer (thingy that designed the dog)
What is the evidence showing the dog designed by the designer. Keep in mind, appearance of design by a designer is not evidence, rather a preconceived assumption.
Upvote
0
Oncedeceived
Senior Veteran
I don't find that a reasonable request especially when you have no suggestions on how one might measure design. We all recognize design visually without weighing it or using a ruler. We don't have to question or objectively prove design when we see it.
We don't have to rest on subjective "opinion" on which of these appears to be designed.
With the cliff face we are confronted with a contour that could be seen as a face, was it created by natural processes or was it sculpted by an intelligent agent to mimic the contours of a face, that is the question is it not?
Looking at the information available it is conceivable that the cliff face could have been produced by natural processes, Mt. Rushmore on the other hand appears designed, we understand how natural processes such as wind and rain can affect structures such as rock and we understand as well that that process could not have created Mt. Rushmore due to the complexity of the features and even if we were not to know who the faces are, we do know that the intent of the intelligent agent had purpose..i.e. carving four men's faces in the cliff.
Upvote
0
Oncedeceived
Senior Veteran
Perhaps the problem you are having is that you don't have a strong sense for the working system and why it appears designed. You might visually "look" at it and not see design, which is the point in fact. It is in how the BF works, how it is constructed and its purpose that adds to the appearance of design.
Upvote
0
Oncedeceived
Senior Veteran
I assume that you are using the atheist argument of if God designed everything what is not designed?
We can look at human design for an answer. We humans design things. We landscape our yards, while we might leave parts of our property untouched but while landscaping we might have left over gravel, or perhaps rock and randomly throw them to the side. The materials are all the same but the "design" of the landscape is apparent while the materials we used are randomly laying about. We can build a play house and during the creation of that designed object we see random left over material such as sawdust, nails, and boards laying about. We can recognize the finished product as the design and the materials created in the process as non-designed even though they are made of the same material.
Upvote
0
I see no reason why a stationary eyeball would have to make the giant leap to a fully movable eyeball all in one step.
And again with the name calling. Instead of throwing mud, why don't you address what Darwin wrote.
Upvote
0
I gave you a complex system with purpose and function that came about through natural processes. That example was the complex river systems that have the function of moving water off of the continents with the purpose of moving water to the ocean.
Upvote
0
We need more than assertions. Where is the evidence that these observations were the result of design?
Why can't nature produce something that an engineer struggles with?
Upvote
0
If you want to play that game, we demand that you show us how the designer came about before we will accept any claims of something being designed. Or do you want to talk about the designer as if it just popped into existence as is?
Upvote
0
Oncedeceived
Senior Veteran
It is obvious with this question why you believe the things you believe.
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
