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, that's what you're trying to prove. You can't use it as a premise in your argument.a natural process cant make human genome. only design.
but we can say the same for a plastic. so why you conclude design when you see aplastic but not in living thing?Not necessarily. The first life may have arisen from non-living matter by a natural process, in which case we wouldn't be able to tell whether it was designed or not.
have you seen a living thing evolving from non living thing? if not then what is true for a plastic is also true for a living thing. case close.
I have never seen molded plastic components in a living thing.but we can say the same for a plastic. so why you conclude design when you see aplastic but not in living thing?
we will see about that.
since the genome code for complex biological systems (including motors) thuse we can conclude design when we see a human genome. a natural process cant make human genome. only design.
its a theoretical question. so can you detect design if you will see a self replicating car or not?
No we can't. Every plastic we are aware of has been created by humans using well documented processes and ingredients. If you can demonstrate the same for living things then please do so.but we can say the same for a plastic.
Because we know how plastics are made by humans. There is no evidence of them being made by any natural process.so why you conclude design when you see aplastic but not in living thing?
so a self replicating car isnt evidence for design?
i will try to do that when you will show me how life evolved from non-life. if you cant then what is true for a plastic is also true for life.Not closed in the slightest.
To get any of your claims to work, you'd have to show plastic being formed via natural process.
how is that relevant? you said that a plastic is evidence for design since we never seen a natural process making a plastic. so the same is true for life- we never seen how a narual process can make life from non life. thus according to your criteria life also need design.I have never seen molded plastic components in a living thing.
This isn't a method for detecting design; it's just an assertion of the very thing you're being asked to demonstrate. This is called Circular reasoning and it's another logical fallacy.
Changing the terms of your argument is not going to help you. Evolution is about how living creatures change and diversify after life exists. How life first came into existence from non-life is a separate question.how is that relevant? you said that a plastic is evidence for design since we never seen a natural process making a plastic. so the same is true for life- we never seen how a narual process can make life from non life. thus according to your criteria life also need design.
No, we don't know that. In fact, the theory of evolution has a plausible explanation for it.its not. when we see a spinning motor we know that a natural process cant make such a motor. thus we can detect design. its not at all a circular reasonning.
It won't. The presence of intelligent design cannot always be detected.on the other hand- if an artifical genome will be indetical to a "natural" one how your "human design detection" will work?
so you agree that the first life need design like a plastic need?Changing the terms of your argument is not going to help you. Evolution is about how living creatures change and diversify after life exists. How life first came into existence from non-life is a separate question.
I don't know. Know one does at this point, but it is relatively certain that if life did arise by a natural process with or without design, it wasn't by the same process as evolution.so you agree that the first life need design like a plastic need?
its not. when we see a spinning motor we know that a natural process cant make such a motor. thus we can detect design. its not at all a circular reasonning.
on the other hand- if an artifical genome will be indetical to a "natural" one how your "human design detection" will work?
i will try to do that when you will show me how life evolved from non-life. if you cant then what is true for a plastic is also true for life.
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?