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.
For one, i read the book. Have you?
You have not yet defined life.Bio can be broadly defined as life from life. It prevents life from exclusive nonlife no matter the source. It can't happen absent a living source. It is blind faith. Akin to asserting the Earth was flat and somehow became a sphere. There is no evidence, no precedent. Not one thing in the present to retrodict to the past.
You win TGM,
For those who are a little slow to catch on.. you win, I have no answer for you.
1. How much more complex is a human compared to an earthworm?
2. What would I think of someone if they firmly believed that the Space Shuttle, the supercomputer and the most advanced robotic system was the result of random mindless chance rather than an intelligent designer?
People don´t seem to have problems believing in an undesigned designer of ALL of these things, even thought this designer would have to be the most comlex of all these things. So your argument doesn´t lead anywhere without running into inconsisteny.Which is more complex: the worlds fastest supercomputer, the worlds most advanced robotic system, the Space Shuttle, or, an earthworm?
Answer: The earthworm. Nobody knows how to make an earthworm. The DNA and its reproductive system is beyond anything ever created by man.
1. How much more complex is a human compared to an earthworm?
2. What would I think of someone if they firmly believed that the Space Shuttle, the supercomputer and the most advanced robotic system was the result of random mindless chance rather than an intelligent designer?
I know you don't.
I know ID nonsense hasn't contributed anything to scientific advancement.
I know it has no practical application.
I know there is nothing even remotely scientific about it.
In summary, I know it's just a priori religious nonsense.
Yet you show up on a Christian board often, and unlike most people who feel something is nonsense, you fight it tooth and nail, as if you are afraid of it, as if it threatens you somehow. Then I wonder, how can something that they claim doesn't exist be so threatening to people?
I know, you know, there is a God, and he's not going away in spite of all the whining.
None of this is relevant to the subject at hand and in fact, it's nothing but an ad hominim combined with a red herring.
In case you forgot, the topic is ID and how rational/logical it is. Not what my personal motivations are to discuss said topic.
Like..."white supremacy" doesn´t exist, and yet we find those who advocate it scary? You don´t understand how mere ideas can be threatening even though we think they are false?Then I wonder, how can something that they claim doesn't exist, be so threatening to people?
Then I wonder, how can something that they claim doesn't exist, be so threatening to people?
Like..."white supremacy" doesn´t exist, and yet we find those who advocate it scary? You don´t understand how mere ideas can be threatening even though we think they are false?
That's not the issue. The issue is that there are a bunch of people that believe certain things, but then engage in behaviors based on those beliefs; this can be anything from trying to enact public policies or laws, or in extreme cases acts of outward violence.
That's where most of the conflict tends to arise.
Major league projection.Yet, in general, Atheists show up on a Christian board often, and unlike most people who feel something is nonsense, they fight it tooth and nail, as if they are afraid of it, as if it threatens them somehow. Then I wonder, how can something that they claim doesn't exist, be so threatening to people?
I know, they know, there is a God, and he's not going away in spite of all the whining.
I was just responding to your general confusion as to why people can feel threatened by ideas they don´t believe in.I don't think this idea/fact whatever you choose to call it is threatening. as I see it, Biblical ideals can only make the world better. There was a time when people though the bible was full of good things for anyone.
But in fact, if you really wan to get down to it, that isn't the issue. People will do what they will with the best of things, and I can't help what not jobs do or if they do it in the name of Buddha, Bozo, or God.
They say for everything God has, Satan has a cheap imitation (diabolical mimicry).Oh sure, people will do whatever they want for whatever reasons they want. But that wasn't really my point. My point was simply to shed some light on why atheists will find themselves on religious web sites butting heads with religious folks.
I don't think this idea/fact whatever you choose to call it is threatening. as I see it, Biblical ideals can only make the world better
There was a time when people though the bible was full of good things for anyone.
Since when did that become a science standard? Another ad hoc rescue, pull a standard out of our backside and throw it up there. There is nothing prohibiting God made everything in 6 days and made it all to look millions of years old. You come on here and claim to represent science and throw up these standards which are alien. Nothing prohibiting winning the Powerball twenty time in a row. It certainly is not impossible. You need to prove your positive and not expect us to prove the negative.No, this is not what biogenesis refers to. While biogenesis does refer to life from other life, there is nothing strictly prohibiting life from arising from non-life.
Spon gen is life from nonlife broadly defined. Lets not quibble over definitions out of desperation.Most of what has been disproved was the idea of spontaneous generation; which again, is the idea of fully formed modern organisms just appearing from non-living sources.
It comes by the intervention of a living source as the most reasonable. Absent a living source, we would not be here.However, there is nothing strictly precluding life arising from non-living sources. In fact, we know that life must have arisen from non-living sources since life on this planet does not appear to have always been here. At some point it had to come from somewhere.
It comes by the intervention of a living source as the most reasonable. Absent a living source, we would not be here.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?