My Creationism vs Intelligent Design Challenge

[AV1611VET]

.....What 'Science'??

The science that had to be ruled on in court.

I don't think IDers realize that adding science to creationism is like adding heat to an ice cream cone.

It destroys it ... not enhances it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The science that had to be ruled on in court.

I don't think IDers realize that adding science to creationism is like adding heat to an ice cream cone.

It destroys it ... not enhances it.

The problem was that there was no science in ID. That is why it lost. In other words, all they had was faith.

 

[Loudmouth]

I guess the evidence is found through either deductive reason or the law of cause and effect. In order for something to be built, there must be a builder right?

Where is the evidence that this builder is a deity?

Clouds build. Do they require a deity to build them?

Crystals are built in rocks. Do they require a deity to build them?

Thermohaline currents are built. Do they require a deity to build them?

Mountains are built. Do they require a deity to build them?

 

[rturner76]

Where is the evidence that this builder is a deity?

Clouds build. Do they require a deity to build them?

Crystals are built in rocks. Do they require a deity to build them?

Thermohaline currents are built. Do they require a deity to build them?

Mountains are built. Do they require a deity to build them?

Yes, they all require some kind of "creative force" which is the definition I was using for God. An eternal, creative force

 

[rturner76]

Bad analogy. It appears that you are trying to claim that the universe was "built".

Built, made, created, any of these are acceptable

 

[Loudmouth]

Yes, they all require some kind of "creative force" which is the definition I was using for God. An eternal, creative force

God is the process of water condensation? Really?

Seems like "God" is a pretty meaningless term.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Built, made, created, any of these are acceptable

You are still making the error of assuming that any of those occurred. You are making a circular argument.

Try again.

 

[rturner76]

God is the process of water condensation? Really?

Seems like "God" is a pretty meaningless term.

I can't make it any more clear about there being a creative force behind life (creation). I recommend seeking out either a theologian or a philosopher for clarity if the concept of a universal creator is too complicated.

 

[rturner76]

You are still making the error of assuming that any of those occurred. You are making a circular argument.

Try again.

Let me see if I got this straight, creation never occurred and life never happened? Wow that's an interesting perspective. Next time I look in the mirror, I'll tell myself I don't existbut I won't believe myself because I'll be looking at myself.

 

[Loudmouth]

I can't make it any more clear about there being a creative force behind life (creation). I recommend seeking out either a theologian or a philosopher for clarity if the concept of a universal creator is too complicated.

What you aren't clear on is how that creative force is God instead of some natural process.

 

[rturner76]

What you aren't clear on is how that creative force is God instead of some natural process.

The two aren't mutually exclusive. I think the concept of God shouldn't be limited to a human's capacity. Many equate God to a human being with Godly or infinite power. A universal creative force does not need to take a bodily form. The concept is that God IS a force of nature, not supernatural.

 

[Loudmouth]

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

By definition, they are mutually exclusive.

I think the concept of God shouldn't be limited to a human's capacity. Many equate God to a human being with Godly or infinite power. A universal creative force does not need to take a bodily form. The concept is that God IS a force of nature, not supernatural.

That makes God superfluous.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Let me see if I got this straight, creation never occurred and life never happened? Wow that's an interesting perspective. Next time I look in the mirror, I'll tell myself I don't existbut I won't believe myself because I'll be looking at myself.

You are not arguing properly. It seems that you do not understand how to even begin.

Did I imply that you did not exist in any way at all? If you believe that you are clearly mistaken. Try again and see if you can avoid logical fallacies this time.

 

[rturner76]

You are not arguing properly. It seems that you do not understand how to even begin.

Did I imply that you did not exist in any way at all? If you believe that you are clearly mistaken. Try again and see if you can avoid logical fallacies this time.

I said the universe was built (I should have said created). I was told that it wasn't. That's seemed silly to me since we are all using our minds and bodies in a common reality. Unless this is all just a dream. Even if this was a dream I would be a real person somewhere having the dream so yeah, we've been created. We exist

 

[AV1611VET]

The problem was that there was no science in ID. That is why it lost. In other words, all they had was faith.

Uh-huh.

And I'm Genghis Khan.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I said the universe was built (I should have said created). I was told that it wasn't. That's seemed silly to me since we are all using our minds and bodies in a common reality. Unless this is all just a dream. Even if this was a dream I would be a real person somewhere having the dream so yeah, we've been created. We exist

You can't just assume that the universe was created and try to use that to justify your conclusion. That is circular reasoning. If you want to claim that there was a creator the burden of proof is upon you.

Try one more time without unwarranted and improper assumptions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Uh-huh.

And I'm Genghis Khan.

Thank you for admitting to your error. Now we need to do something about your Genghis Khan delusion.

 

[MissRowy]

If you are Genghis Khan then you must be nearly 800 years old AV!! Somehow I don't think so. Pick someone thats still alive and we might actually believe you lol

 

[AV1611VET]

If you are Genghis Khan then you must be nearly 800 years old AV!! Somehow I don't think so. Pick someone thats still alive and we might actually believe you lol

LOL

How about Sarah Palin?

 

[Bugeyedcreepy]

I said the universe was built (I should have said created). I was told that it wasn't. That's seemed silly to me since we are all using our minds and bodies in a common reality. Unless this is all just a dream. Even if this was a dream I would be a real person somewhere having the dream so yeah, we've been created. We exist

So wrong on so many levels. You weren't told that it didn't exist, just that it wasn't necessarily brought about by an intelligent creation. When the premise of your argument is unfounded then there's no way the conclusion should be accepted as fact by default. What evidence is there for the beginning of our universe? Why should I accept it was created? It could've come about naturally via some as yet unknown mechanism, or there could be some type of eternal existence punctuated by a singularity that brought about this latest incarnation of this universe, or, the ever more popular multiverse could have brought about the beginning of this universe... none requiring an implausible & incredible supreme intelligence...

Take you for example. You were born, not created. You have a biological mother and father and we can test you using dna to verify that fact. You started out as a uni-celled embryo to get to the size and complexity you are now through absolutely well understood biological and molecular processes. All the evidence we have indicates no intelligence required.