What's enough evidence?

[rmwilliamsll]

If one can believe a natural explanation for a random natural human eye that can sense the light and a random natural human brain that can interpret the message why not also a random message in the stars which is much less complex?

Men have had quite a bit of time to work on natural explanations for the former. What makes you think they wouldn't be able to come up with something for the latter? A few hundred years and all kinds of naturalistic models would be developed. Anything but God!

If intelligence is not required to form intelligence, they why would it be required to form and intelligent message?

because complexity, in itself, does not carry a meaning message. the root cause of ID's problems with the scientific community. There are several ways that God could have signed life, could have made it, beyond reasonable doubt, designed. Thus far, we have not found those signatures. complexity alone is not one of them. a unique genetic code for each "kind" could have been.


....

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

If it helps you put this in perspective I’ll try to offer an example. Snowflakes are more complex than post-it® paper. The former is not designed and the later is.

 

[Calminian]

Simply because complexity is not a valid indicator of intelligent design.

Then a message in the stars in not an indicator of intelligence. Beside complexity what else does it have?

I know it’s hard to not play the persecuted theist but science isn’t trying to refute your god™.

I've never believed scientists were out to persecute me. Nor even evolutionists nor atheists. Historical atheists and evolutionists don't have a very good track record in the area of human rights, but modern atheists are much more tolerant.

Yes, science will look for a natural explanation but these things are a natural impossibility. If stars suddenly rearranged to spell a message or sands did the same then we can recognize that as anomalistic to say the least.

There's no doubt it would be called an anomaly but that's far from calling it a miracle or an act of God. Many would sooner give credit to advanced alien magicians. Trust me, as the years would go by, theories would come out of the woodwork.

Because it’s not a matter of intelligent design at all. It’s a matter of what’s naturally possible and what is not.

How could you possibly believe that something you observed was not possible? Doesn't observation make it possible by definition? And if you observed such a thing why would you not come up with hypotheses on how it came about? Are you going to let emotion dictate your beliefs?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

Then a message in the stars in not an indicator of intelligence. Beside complexity what else does it have?

meaningfulness

 

[Calminian]

If it helps you put this in perspective I’ll try to offer an example. Snowflakes are more complex than post-it® paper. The former is not designed and the later is.

I actually sell post-Its so I'm somewhat an expert in this area. Post-Its technically do have a natural explanation. They are the product of natural human brains that formed naturally from particles over billions of years. In fact, if you know your Post-It history, they were technically an accident.

 

[Calminian]

meaningfulness

You see the human brain as meaningless?

 

[rmwilliamsll]

I actually sell post-Its so I'm somewhat an expert in this area. Post-Its technically do have a natural explanation. They are the product of natural human brains that formed naturally from particles over billions of years. In fact, if you know your Post-It history, they were technically an accident.

the notes were not an accident, they are deliberately designed.
it was the discovery of the glue that was serendipitous.

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

Then a message in the stars in not an indicator of intelligence. Beside complexity what else does it have?

a cause that is a natural impossibility.

There's no doubt it would be called an anomaly but that's far from calling it a miracle or an act of God. Many would sooner give credit to advanced alien magicians. Trust me, as the years would go by, theories would come out of the woodwork.

Between it being much more than a simple anomaly, it would also convey a message. If we found aliens that had the technology to move stars then we may have a natural theory then, but not you’re stretching hypothetical to it’s limits. If the starts aligned to give a message from god you have to admit that you would be ecstatic and it would cause many people to convert right? I mean, it would be considered definitive proof by you and every theist right?

How could you possibly believe that something you observed was not possible? Doesn't observation make it possible by definition? And if you observed such a thing why would you not come up with hypotheses on how it came about? Are you going to let emotion dictate your beliefs?

This is the point right? We are talking evidence for the supernatural. Science can certainly identify something as not natural. If that something is not natural and naturally impossible then science will not have an answer. This is what science would have to end up with if there was a supernatural cause. The phenomenon would be so spectacular that it would beg the acknowledgement of supernatural cause. Such a feat would still be child’s play for an entity that allegedly created the universe though. It becomes a matter of reason at that point. Pointing to a complex structure as evidence does not beg god as a rational conclusion just because it is complex.

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

I actually sell post-Its so I'm somewhat an expert in this area. Post-Its technically do have a natural explanation. They are the product of natural human brains that formed naturally from particles over billions of years. In fact, if you know your Post-It history, they were technically an accident.

Hopefully you are being facetious here. Otherwise you are redefining natural mid stream. Post-It® notes are designed but simple. Just because the glue was an accident doesn’t mean the product wasn’t designed.

 

[Calminian]

a cause that is a natural impossibility.

Now come on EA, you're are dodging here. Apart from its complexity, what is leading you to believe it is a natural impossibility?

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

Now come on EA, you're are dodging here. Apart from its complexity, what is leading you to believe it is a natural impossibility?

Not at all. We have mapped out the sky. We know where the stars should be. If all of a sudden stars moved to spell out “I did it all! Love God” then I would recognize that as a fantastic natural impossibility. OR how about all the stars moving around to make a nice monochrome video of god giving us a thumbs up and sound emanating from everywhere saying “I DID IT ALL BABY! LOVE GOD”. We would have a nice big fat juicy scientifically observable miracle and I, along with probably everyone else, would be believers. It’s a natural impossibility because it would go against how we know stars should behave. I’m not dodging. I’m not sure how to be more clear.

 

[Calminian]

Not at all. We have mapped out the sky. We know where the stars should be. If all of a sudden stars moved to spell out “I did it all! Love God” then I would recognize that as a fantastic natural impossibility. OR how about all the stars moving around to make a nice monochrome video of god giving us a thumbs up and sound emanating from everywhere saying “I DID IT ALL BABY! LOVE GOD”. We would have a nice big fat juicy scientifically observable miracle and I, along with probably everyone else, would be believers. It’s a natural impossibility because it would go against how we know stars should behave. I’m not dodging. I’m not sure how to be more clear.

I see. So a message made of stars wouldn't be enough. Let's say we invented the most powerful telescope ever and looked out and saw a group of stars that spelled out, "I did it!—God" That wouldn't be enough. You would need to actually see the stars leave their places and the messages assemble before your eyes. Correct??

 

[Loudmouth]

Or just replicate what Jesus claimed christians are capable of. Just move a mountain for us.


Matthew 17:20 (New International Version)



20He replied, "Because you have so little faith. I tell you the truth, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."[a]

 

[Calminian]

Or just replicate what Jesus claimed christians are capable of. Just move a mountain for us.

I noticed you guys seem to want to change subjects rather quickly. How about just answering my simple question? Would the discovery of an arrangement of stars spelling a message be enough evidence for you to accept a Designer? Yes, no, why, why not?

The mustard seed issues is quite simple. Jesus was explaining the we do not have the faith necessary to perform these great miracles. Even the faith we have in God is said to be a gift from God.

 

[Loudmouth]

I noticed you guys seem to want to change subjects rather quickly. How about just answering my simple question? Would the discovery of an arrangement of stars spelling a message be enough evidence for you to accept a Designer? Yes, no, why, why not?

I thought the original question was what phenomena would point to a creator or designer. I think the mustard seed example is a good one, the sudden moving of a mountain would be impossible to explain through natural laws.

The "message in the stars" is a pretty slippery example. I could connect any number of stars to spell out anything I wanted, like "Satan was here" or "You were not Designed". Any random pattern of a sufficient number of points (billions of stars would suffice) can spell out anything. The trick is for the stars making up the Big Dipper (or Plough for our non-US readers) to suddenly move and arrange themselves into the sentence "God Designed You". I would accept the presence of a Designer if that happened.

The mustard seed issues is quite simple. Jesus was explaining the we do not have the faith necessary to perform these great miracles. Even the faith we have in God is said to be a gift from God.

It was an example. I will accept your explanation.

 

[AnEmpiricalAgnostic]

I see. So a message made of stars wouldn't be enough. Let's say we invented the most powerful telescope ever and looked out and saw a group of stars that spelled out, "I did it!—God" That wouldn't be enough. You would need to actually see the stars leave their places and the messages assemble before your eyes. Correct??

Sheesh… now who’s the one dodging? Yes. Finding an arrangement that spelled out the message would also be a natural impossibility and would therefore fall under the miracle category. Let me be clear as loudmouth pointed out. I’m not talking about some vague perceivable arrangement where we would need to connect the dots. I’m talking a glorious start studded shining font leaving no room for question. Ultimately you are splitting hairs now. It can be anything that is a natural impossibility. Move a mountain like LM said. Arrange sand. Whatever. The point is that there can be an infinite number of clear miracles that god could do for us to see and test. However, these are conspicuously absent.

 

[wagsbags]

It's really unreasonable to claim that god is doing everything possible to make it obvious that he is the one true creator. Unless you really want to claim that the entire non-christian world is just dumb. But then you'd be wrong.

 

[Nightson]

Because Calminian split off the question of what would convince people of a designer, I'm bringing this one back and putting it back on topic.

Creationists, what evidence or multiple pieces of evidence would convince you that evolution happened.

 

[TrueCreation]

Creationists, what evidence or multiple pieces of evidence would convince you that evolution happened.

This question has nothing to do with science.

-Chris Grose

 

[Nightson]

This question has nothing to do with science.

-Chris Grose

I do believe that the scientific theory for the origins, does indeed relate to science. Would you mind clarifing your point?