Oncedeceived
Senior Veteran
No, life forms show evidence of design, it is your burden if you claim that evidence is inaccurate and is only an illusion. Stop trying to shift the burden. You have this burden.
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.
No, life forms show evidence of design, it is your burden if you claim that evidence is inaccurate and is only an illusion. Stop trying to shift the burden. You have this burden.You are assuming your conclusion. That is a logical fallacy, not evidence.
No it is not a scientific argument. When has it every been presented in a peer reviewed paper?No, its an argument used by scientists. Are you suggesting all scientists are atheists. If so, then I need to change my designated faith in my profile.
I just answered that.Back to the appearance of a face on that cliff; how would you show that something only appears designed? Is that possible to do, or not?
Illusion, based on how I explained we can use inductive reasoning to come to our conclusions.Back to the appearance of a face on that cliff; Illusion or design?
How so?
ERV is used to show common ancestry, it doesn't provide any evidence for life forms appearring to be designed for a purpose is an illusion.
Illusion, based on how I explained we can use inductive reasoning to come to our conclusions.
No, life forms show evidence of design,
it is your burden if you claim that evidence is inaccurate and is only an illusion. Stop trying to shift the burden. You have this burden.
No, its an argument used by scientists. Are you suggesting all scientists are atheists. If so, then I need to change my designated faith in my profile.
Just to clarify this, I think that all biologists agree that living things show the appearance of design in that they are adapted to their environments, but it does not follow that that appearance is evidence of actual intelligent design. As I understand it, the appearance of design is a consequence of a process of natural selection, that is differential reproductive success.Yet, you can not give one piece of evidence that the appearance of design in living forms is an illusion.
Just to clarify this, I think that all biologists agree that living things show the appearance of design, but it does not follow that that appearance is evidence of actual intelligent design. As I understand it, the appearance of design is a consequence of a process of natural selection, that is differential reproductive success.
It is also a product of pareidolia:
"Pareidolia (/pærɨˈdoʊliə/ parr-i-DOH-lee-ə) is a psychological phenomenon involving a stimulus (an image or a sound) which is perceived as significant."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html
It is a human bias that causes us to see faces in clouds and make other false associations. This is why we have the scientific method, to reduce the effects of these human biases. The last thing you want to do is use this human bias as the foundation of your entire argument as the ID/creationists have done.
Even more amusing, I haven't argued against a designer, rather evidence connecting to a designer.You know, I always find this amusing, when by sheer numbers, more Christians disagree with her position, than atheists do.
Gotta label any disagreement as atheist though.
To get evidence to support the cliff face is only an illusion and not produced by an intelligent agent we would look at the processes available to produce the appearance of that face. We would look at the information available to us from known natural processes such as wind, rain, gravity, and the ocean and how they affect this type of structure. We would examine the structure and take note whether the properties being examined show the properties that we know are intelligently designed or those that do not have those properties. If the evidence shows that this type of structure, the type that begins as a sea cliff, the ocean pounds this structure eroding the weaker and softer rock and leaves the harder and stronger rock behind. This erosion is a known process that is sufficient in creating the outline in the rock and no other properties of an intelligent agent are present, it would be determined that the face was not produced by an intelligent design and the natural processes or mechanisms to produce it show it is an illusion.Now provide evidence that it is only an illusion.
But when this "pareidolia" satisfies a faith belief, away we go...............
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?