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.
A good guess though, since the Antikythera Mechanism has quite a lot of text written in Greek on it.I'm looking for the guy who did it. If we have to know the designer before we can determine if something is designed or not.
And "the Greeks" is just a guess.
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.Design in nature is the scientific evidence of the designer and what better testimony than from my video of someone who hates what he see that living systems seem to be designed by someone a million times smarter than him.
You can't get better scientific evidence than that.
Having said that, what evidence shows what is perceived to be designed (natural animate and inanimate objects) by said designer?Design must by definition quantifies a designer.
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.lol. If you could, then you would have already.
We don't have to rest on subjective "opinion" on which of these appears to be designed.So that it is not simply opinion.
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?That is was an actual human face was not the issue; it may be an intentional design in the rock, or it may just be an illusion. What would you provide as evidence for the face in that cliff being an illusion?
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.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.
lol. If you could, then you would have already.
So that it is not simply opinion.
That is was an actual human face was not the issue; it may be an intentional design in the rock, or it may just be an illusion. What would you provide as evidence for the face in that cliff being an illusion?
I assume that you are using the atheist argument of if God designed everything what is not designed?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.
FAIL.You know what comes next?
If it was explained to you, you wouldn't understand it anyway.
A stationary eye would be an advantage than a moving eyeball in an eye socket without muscles.
I never called Darwin a name. A fairy tale is his "the little eyeball that could" story and has nothing to do with science. In fact he wished the fossil record support his story but he knew it didn't and it still doesn't. His intermediate were living creatures of his day.
What?
Anyone who refused to believe "design in nature" is real then no scientific evidence could prove to that person that it is. Design in nature is part of our universe and both by default is assumed to be real unless there is good evidence to prove otherwise.
"On the one hand it's extremely well organized, but on the other hand the sheer scale of all of this unfamiliar well-organized stuff that happens in there makes me feel that I've stumbled onto an alternate landscape of technology that's built by an engineer a million times smarter than me."
Oh I see, you just want to talk about it as if it just popped into existence as is...
Design in nature is the scientific evidence of the designer . . .
It is obvious with this question why you believe the things you believe.You still haven't answered how you know Mt. Rushmore is designed.
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?