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.
And debating with you is like:
You are like the one with the tail...just holding on to the limited view you "see" as evidence and yet the entire elephant is obscured.
Shifting the burden.
How can something be subjective when it is objectively present in life forms?
It lacks the hexaganol structure that ice has.
This is still going round in circles I see.
Any ID folks provide a workable definition for ID yet?
Any ID folks provide a test to determine when this ID is present, that is falsifiable yet?
How low can you stoop?
YOU are the one claiming designed. YOU are the one who claims there is objective evidence for design.
YOU!!
Start producing the evidence.
Any illusions of design folks offer any evidence yet? No?
We have evidence that it is possible to have the illusion of design when there is no designer. Snowflakes are the most popular example.
You folks sure try your very best to change the focus from humanity to rocks, rivers and now snowflakes.
Now, where's your evidence of illusion of design in humanity?
As supporters of evolution, we merely point out the challenges as they come. The evidence of lack of design in humans would be the features contradictory to good design practice, such as the uretha going through the prostate, the backwards wiring of nerves and blood vessels in the retina, the ridiculous routing of the nerve that activates the larynx, the development of a genetic basis for conserving vitamin c in humans when it would be just as easy for a designer to simply provide a working vitamin c gene.
There are also some features that have no function, such as the little toes on the feet and the muscles for wiggling the ears. And it seems to me that linking the vitamin D production - a rather important vitamin - to how much sunlight hits our skin is not exactly the best design idea in the world.
You're in disagreement with Dawkins concerning the illusion of then design then?
Your conclusion, as a Christian, is that God had nothing to do with the creation of the frankenstein-ish human body?
I think that Dawkins would agree with my statement there.
God created a universe that would inevitably bring forth life, but God allowed life to come about through the operation of natural law, as He designed it to do.
It is possible to design a theology that requires evolution of intelligent life from natural laws. Hypothetically, for example, if there was a fallen spiritual being whose final judgement had to be postponed because of his rights to reside on our planet, it might be a legal maneuver to have the planet itself, through naturally evolved life forms, reject his rights to be on the planet. Hmmm . . . maybe there's a possible story to be written there. The ideal time for the rejection will be at the time of resurrection, after the meek have inherited the earth.
As supporters of evolution, we merely point out the challenges as they come. The evidence of lack of design in humans would be the features contradictory to good design practice, such as the uretha going through the prostate, the backwards wiring of nerves and blood vessels in the retina, the ridiculous routing of the nerve that activates the larynx, the development of a genetic basis for conserving vitamin c in humans when it would be just as easy for a designer to simply provide a working vitamin c gene. There are also some features that have no function, such as the little toes on the feet and the muscles for wiggling the ears. And it seems to me that linking the vitamin D production - a rather important vitamin - to how much sunlight hits our skin is not exactly the best design idea in the world.
This makes no sense.
The evidence is found through scientific means.
That's circular reasoning. God refutes the ToE by showing that Humans did NOT have our origin on Planet Earth. You can read of these Scoffers of the last days, who remind me of Evolution Religionists, in ll Peter 3:3-7. They are willingly ignorant that Adam's world was totally destroyed in the Flood. Amen?
using the bible to prove the bible, but *I* am the one who is circular.... right.
This is still going round in circles I see.
Any ID folks provide a workable definition for ID yet?
Any ID folks provide a test to determine when this ID is present, that is falsifiable yet?
The burden of evidence for ID is on the ID folks. You go around in circles of your own making.Shifting the burden.
Are you going to produce objective evidence that apparent design is a false interpretation of the evidence?So are you going to produce that objective measurement for design?
Are you going to produce objective evidence that apparent design is a false interpretation of the evidence?
Perhaps but...It lacks the hexaganol structure that ice has.
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?