Yeah but laypeople don't think about that. All they see is complexity and jump to "WOW! Design!"
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.
I will say before this gets out hand that there is no illusion of design. We do not look designed. Things we design look like us because we draw inspiration from ourselves. This thread goes into great detail about how life does not look designed as life falls into a nested hierarchy while things that are designed do not.
All I can tell you is to take it up with the proper authorities, if it bothers you so much.Uh it's a Christian forum where Christians wield the power. Christians get banned more on atheist forums, does that mean atheists have better etiquette?
According to his tag line, two rights make one wrong; so he has some convoluted conception of what is right, and it is doing nothing more than confusing him.LOL Now does getting banned mean we are persecuted and by your own standards does this make us more right then you?
All I can tell you is to take it up with the proper authorities, if it bothers you so much.
The QUOTE button is there, it works, and I use it.
If I'm supposed to be ignoring that button because of some unwritten rule of thumb, then that's too bad.
Next, you guys will be whining that I spam counting threads with back-to-back posting in violation of netiquette.
I can assure you I have cleared that with authorities as well.
Let me be blunt here -- don't worry about me, okay?
According to his tag line, two rights make one wrong; so he has some convoluted conception of what is right, and it is doing nothing more than confusing him.
That's your problem -- not mine.I just don't understand why you bump dead threads. You could just start a new one. It's essentially the same thing. I've never seen an OP from a thread you've bumped all of a sudden come back and rejoin the conversation. It's just...I've never seen anyone on forums that has ever had such an odd track-record of resurrecting dead threads. I don't really find it annoying, just absurd.
That's your problem -- not mine.
Have you considered talking to someone who cares?
Good! Glad to hear that!Btw you should be nicer to me. OSAS?
It doesn't. Relax.Modern life looks as if it has a common ancestor. Some people nevertheless believe that modern life were created as is ex nihilo ~10000 years ago (you know who you are ¬ ¬ ).
My question is to them: why does life look like it evolved from a common ancestor?
I agree with both Dawkins and Crick: life has, to an extent, the appearance of design. But appearances can be deceiving. The evidence points to evolution by common descent, which, among other things, explains why life superficially appearance of design. "Looks like it was designed" doesn't mean it was designed.It doesn't. All life, ancient and modern, looks as though it was designed.
Just ask any Darwinist and they'll tell you.
"Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." -- Richard Dawkins, atheist preacher, 1986
"Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved." -- Francis Crick, molecular biologist, 1990
I'd have to agree to this too, but I'd like to add that the appearance of design is purely superficial. When you look in more detail, life always looks more like it evolved than was designed.I agree with both Dawkins and Crick: life has, to an extent, the appearance of design. But appearances can be deceiving. The evidence points to evolution by common descent, which, among other things, explains why life superficially appearance of design. "Looks like it was designed" doesn't mean it was designed.
Could it have been designed to evolve?I'd have to agree to this too, but I'd like to add that the appearance of design is purely superficial. When you look in more detail, life always looks more like it evolved than was designed.
Some people believe this, but it doesn't make much sense to me. This is, essentially, a "god of the gaps" theology, where you place the design at the beginnings of evolution, where there remains quite a bit of uncertainty just due to the fact that it happened so long ago.Could it have been designed to evolve?
You might want to explain that to theistic-evolutionists.Some people believe this, but it doesn't make much sense to me. This is, essentially, a "god of the gaps" theology, where you place the design at the beginnings of evolution, where there remains quite a bit of uncertainty just due to the fact that it happened so long ago.
To bad for theistic-evolutionists.I suppose you can believe it if you wish, but it's liable to be disproven as we learn more and more about abiogenesis.
You might want to explain that to theistic-evolutionists.
To bad for theistic-evolutionists.
A pity. They hold you guys in such high esteem.Some people believe this, but it doesn't make much sense to me. This is, essentially, a "god of the gaps" theology, where you place the design at the beginnings of evolution, where there remains quite a bit of uncertainty just due to the fact that it happened so long ago.
I suppose you can believe it if you wish, but it's liable to be disproven as we learn more and more about abiogenesis.
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?