Why ID is logically incoherant.

[Maxwell511]

No, our brain is just a piece of meat. A very intricate piece of meat but none the less just flesh. When the spirit leaves, the brain is still there, but it no longer can think, can it? Still just a piece of meat. You've heard the term meathead, haven't you?

Seriously, when your spirit leaves the body, you still can think, you are still you, you just no longer have a vehicle to get around here on the earth. The Bible does promise a new body/vehicle to accomodate your spirit at a future time. The promise to those who believe, though.

You said that the spirit is what gives us the ability to know things. If a persons brain is damaged it does effect their ability to know things, does it not?

 

[UncleHermit]

Sad

angryangry angry

and also ballerina

 

[TheOutsider]

You said that the spirit is what gives us the ability to know things. If a persons brain is damaged it does effect their ability to know things, does it not?

Brain damage can cause huge changes in personality too. Heck, enough alcohol or any other drug can affect our "spirit".

 

[FishFace]

Logical Fallacy #4: Your logic

I'd be intrigued to know the flaws in his logic, since a large part of my degree course relies on me being able to spot such flaws. Please enlighten us all.

 

[FishFace]

He admits that it came about by accident but offers no explanation of how it originally came about to even be an accident. No evolutionist has ever been able to answer this. Logic tells us that it had to start from something or someone.

No it doesn't. If it does, please write it out symbolically so we can see just what you mean.
Otherwise, the existing explanations of how life came about (RNA world hypothesis, etc) are good enough to demonstrate that we don't need a creator - there are plausible explanations in place.
As for the start of everything, well - that's where your logic will come in, and presumably smash to pieces everything that has ever been said before on the cosmological argument, in all the centuries it's been in existence.

This is obviously a "misinterpretation" of ID/C/C beliefs and or thoughts, by yet another programmed evolutionist. I don't know any ID proponents who think like this. Creation and ID were around and believed in far before ET was ever around.

I guess you've never heard of irreducible complexity? That's exactly the argument that falls foul of this fallacy.

We have evidence it is just not the evidence you want and it will always be that way.

You have no evidence. You never have, and never will, most likely. That's why you never post in any of the many "is there any evidence FOR creationism" threads.

 

[FishFace]

No, I mean changed lives, miracles, healing, The Spirit of God, etc. but you can't see these things. We can.

Oh, right - yeah, I guess miracle healings would be invisible. Oh wait, no... they should be documented, verifiable and objective. Why is it only you guys can see them again? The same reason only I can see the invisible pink unicorn?

 

[FishFace]

You know that is all hogwash and yet you hold on to it. The only thing that comes from nothing is nothing. You have never experienced nor seen contrary to this happen. It's only in the fairytale of abiogenesis.

Just because you've not experienced something does not mean it's impossible. And if nothing comes from nothing, where did your God come from?
Oh, your God was always there? No, I say the universe was always there. Prove me wrong.

 

[FishFace]

No, because my thoughts are invisible, my love is invisible, the wind is invisible but they all bring about results. Say hello to Harvey for me.

But they are all detectable, nonetheless. Miracles are undetectable from the background noise of randomly getting better. At Lourdes, there are apparently fewer healings than statistics would have us believe.

 

[FishFace]

No, our brain is just a piece of meat. A very intricate piece of meat but none the less just flesh. When the spirit leaves, the brain is still there, but it no longer can think, can it? Still just a piece of meat. You've heard the term meathead, haven't you?

Seriously, when your spirit leaves the body, you still can think, you are still you, you just no longer have a vehicle to get around here on the earth. The Bible does promise a new body/vehicle to accomodate your spirit at a future time. The promise to those who believe, though.

Evidence, please.

 

[Patashu]

If all the brain needs to do is take signals from the spirit (which is supposedly doing all the thinking, desiring and acting), then why is it so darned complex? Heck, it's so complex that just maybe it's doing all this itself...

 

[Loudmouth]

yes there are

Then prove it. Give us objective evidence for the existence of spirits. I can do the same for sound, wind, temperature, and light. Can you do the same?

 

[Loudmouth]

I disagree. Sound is an abstract concept and so are sound waves.

The compression of gases is very real. It can be objectively measured by such simple instruments as diaphragms or microphones.

Love and thoughts are also abstract concepts that are based on real events. Both are concepts and both as real as each other.

They are subjective because I can not experience what you call love or thoughts. I can only experience what I call love and thoughts. We all think we are talking about the same thing, but we have no way of actually testing the idea.

My thoughts are objectively real in the sense that you can measure the firings of my neurons. Do you experience them in the same manner as I do? No. Would you experience the same sound waves in the same manner I do? No.

Actually, we don't know one way or the other.

 

[Maxwell511]

They are subjective because I can not experience what you call love or thoughts. I can only experience what I call love and thoughts. We all think we are talking about the same thing, but we have no way of actually testing the idea.

Why?

If we can talk about D# being the same note played on two different instruments and measure the frequencies of the vibration around the repective instruments to confirm this, why can't we test if what is purported to be the same thing played out on different brains is the same?

Love may be a bit off but for some things neuroscientist can in effect read peoples minds by measuring the firing patterns in their brains.

 

[Patashu]

(nevermind)

 

[NailsII]

I have never seen an accident or explosion from nothing become something and neither have you or any scientist.

Inan, meet the crab nebula.....

​

the chinese certainly thought it was an explosion form nothing - can you prove them wrong?

Can intelligence originate from no intelligence at all? Everything that has a beginning comes from something else that shares traits. Can people rationally feel that thinking organisms had their origin from the mindless inorganic?

Were you intelligent when you were first conceived? A fusing of two cells that couldn't possibly survice outside of its host/mother?
So, everything has a begining eh.
universe started with a big bang then.
What's that I hear you cry? God made the big bang? So what was god's beginning then?

That's interesting...You need a licence to have a TV or watch it?

Yeah, in the UK we have advertisement-free channels (BBC) that are paid for by us in the form of a TV licence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Why?

If we can talk about D# being the same note played on two different instruments and measure the frequencies of the vibration around the repective instruments to confirm this, why can't we test if what is purported to be the same thing played out on different brains is the same?

We can both experience the same sound frequency but we can't experience each other's thoughts. That's the difference.

Love may be a bit off but for some things neuroscientist can in effect read peoples minds by measuring the firing patterns in their brains.

They can predict what they may or may not be thinking, but they can not allow two people to experience each other's thoughts.

 

[Maxwell511]

We can both experience the same sound frequency but we can't experience each other's thoughts. That's the difference.

What if one of us were deaf?

*I'm not deaf.

 

[Loudmouth]

What if one of us were deaf?

*I'm not deaf.

Or tone deaf? What you call D# may be Bb for me.

What we CAN agree on is the frequency of the soundwave if we are using similar sound measuring equipment.

 

[Maxwell511]

Or tone deaf? What you call D# may be Bb for me.

What we CAN agree on is the frequency of the soundwave if we are using similar sound measuring equipment.

And can we also agree if we have the same measuring equipment, i.e. an fMRI, that what love is, is the same for two people.

 

[Loudmouth]

And can we also agree if we have the same measuring equipment, i.e. an fMRI, that what love is, is the same for two people.

I don't think we could, honestly. But that research could change my mind in the future.