There is an Intelligent Designer
Options
Comments
-
PLASTIC RULES wrote: »Human beings are complex biological organisms, and when the slightest thing goes wrong, it can result in disaster, causing genetic malfunctions that result humans lacking the necessary mental and physical capacity to survive long enough to procreate. Humanity did not develop their advanced mental capacities through a long process of evolution and natural selection, because we would have been eliminated before we were able to evolve to such a level. Why have no other organisms on Earth developed the specific traits inherent to being human? Because the amount of time needed to possibly achieve such a complex organism through such methods is longer than the lifespan of our planet and species.
So you assume, based on this post, that there must be a creator because it's impossible for life to have evolved as we have?Humanity did not develop their advanced mental capacities through a long process of evolution and natural selection, because we would have been eliminated before we were able to evolve to such a level.
Do you have the slightest proof of this? What made you come to this conclusion?Because the amount of time needed to possibly achieve such a complex organism through such methods is longer than the lifespan of our planet and species.
How long would it take then, and how old is our planet and species? -
DoUwant2go2Heaven? wrote: »1. Who recorded ? habilis evolving from australopithicus? Who witnessed such an event?
2. Where are the fossils indicating such an event? Such a transition should have thousands upon thousands of fossils capturing such an event.
3. I will assume your ignorant on carbon dating, so I will give you the benefit of the doubt. But carbon dating is flawed beyond belief. A simple Google search will expand your knowledge dramatically, but that's only if you want knowledge, wisdom, and understanding.
4. Jobs encounter is verifiable because it is in the word of ? , the super-natural book of the ages. Hallelujah!
2. You're asking for PROOF, correct? You want tons of fossils, well plenty have been found. Do you not realize how hard it is to find ALL? This is quite a big earth and we are specks of dirt on it trying to find everything to piece together history and we've done a GREAT job at it.
3. Sure, carbon dating is wrong when it doesn't coincide with the bible BUT when it's used on things to date biblical ? , then hell it's correct. LMAO, only when it's convenient right?
Since you ask for PROOF of these fossils to back up the statements made, how about PROOF besides the bible? Where is it written, HISTORICALLY that Moses existed and actually went to free some slaves? Egyptians basically wrote everything down that happened, especially something like this that was so big. Moses, a non Egyptian was raised as one, who freed the Hebrew slaves and brought upon Egypt plagues. Where is that in Egypt's history?
Or even more, the most IMPORTANT figure (if real) JESUS. Where is there ANY PIECE of HISTORICAL evidence of him? Where is there any image painted or carved? Here, the commandment won't matter, because it would've been done, trust that. Where is there any type of writing from HIS TIME? Where is his tomb? Where is ANYTHING PHYSICAL that can trace back to Jesus w/o a shadow of a doubt?
Where is there evidence for a global flood? There would have to be evidence, no doubt.
Surely since you ask for all sorts of evidence from the other side, such as THOUSANDS OF FOSSILS, you surely would have evidence yourself for your claims or your books claims. I'm sure you aren't being a hypocritical person, are you?
Again, the bible isn't evidence. Just like I cannot claim a science book that is just itself PURELY evidence w/o backing it up. In science there's PLENTY to back up almost every claim. Can you back up yours as you want science to do theirs? -
In fact, if we look at the Earth's lifespan (6+ billion years) and then at the lifespan of humans (6 million years), we can easily see why it is not a stretch that other lifeforms on our planet (or in space) should have developed similar, or superior cognitive, artificial and neurological systems. So, we can infer two things from these numbers: a) humans are lucky, and/or b) a relatively rapid acceleration was intiated, specifically targeted to the one species that could cope with such an extreme leap. If we look at our closest relatives, the chimps, and note the disparities between us and them (1% genetic difference yet a quantum leap in everything else) we can see evidence of an "intelligent designer" aware of how to manipulate genetics. In 2006, a CBSE researcher said "We found 18 differences between chimps and humans, which is an incredible amount of change to have happened in a few million years."
-
Damn I hit these ? with dat factual knowledge and they all scurry now b.
-
I get that the universe is 'designed' but nothing in it suggest an intelligent designer. PZ Meyers did a talk once touching on the concept of design. He looked at things designed by nature and those by the only intelligence we know ... humans.
He examined two walls. One a sea wall of drift wood that had been arranged by random natural forces and the other a brick wall made by humans. The immediate difference seen is the brick wall is very simple. It serves the purpose of a wall and that about it. The drift wood wall on the other hand is very complex, needlessly so. It serves multiple functions as it is also a biosphere for several species. Basically things designed naturally are sloppy while thing designed intelligently are neat.
When we look at the universe then if we find things overly complex and multi-functional then it would lends itself to a nature process that created the world. If we find things simple and functional then an intelligent designer. In Einstein case I think it is fair to say he saw this simple order and it shows in his theory of General Relativity. It explains a simple and elegant universe. Unfortunately, it is not the universe in which we live. While his theory works wonderfully nearly the entire world of physics focus on trying to integrate the beautiful simplicity of relativity to the madness of quantum theory. No one is working on taming the madness of quantum mechanics to integrate them into relativity. Einstein, who helped launched Quantum Theory, could never quite accept it since it would force him to abandon the wonderful elegance he saw at the macroscopic level of relativity. The quantum universe in which we live is massively complex, amazingly sloppy. It does not whisper ' There is no creator' it shouts it.
The behavior of matter at the atomic level is nuts. DNA is a mess at all but the the simplest levels of life. Humans have bones we don't need. Organs that have lost their functionality. More teeth than their jaws can fit. Eyes designed with blind spots in them. Bipedal joints that can not support the wear and tear of bipedal motion. The vast majority of species that have ever lived on this planet are extinct. Recent research has found that 1 in 37 stars has a rocky planet like earth leading to more than 2,000,000 possible earth-like planets. But this does not mention the 74,000,000 star systems that have no life in them. That's an enormous amount of matter to commit to 'empty' space.
It is beyond me how somehow looks at this universe as sees an 'intelligent' designer. Given the sloppy and wasteful nature of the universe if there is an 'awareness' behind it ... that awareness is an idiot.
Good post but our intelligence is limited by the human experience. Of course at this point in time our creations will look "simple" compared to those seen in nature. One factor you fail to consider is that natural systems appear to require no input from external "intelligent" sources in order to function as they were designed to, whereas when we create something it requires our direct input. (i.e. natural systems build on themselves and are bound to certain fundamental laws, thus they would indeed appear "sloppy" opposed to our creations wherein we can control almost every aspect, make corrections as we go, etc.) -
PLASTIC RULES wrote: »Damn I hit these ? with dat factual knowledge and they all scurry now b.
LMAO. You have done nothing but assume ? , you haven't tried to back up your statements. -
LMAO. You have done nothing but assume ? , you haven't tried to back up your statements.
I bacced them up, read the post before that. -
PLASTIC RULES wrote: »I bacced them up, read the post before that.
You're making assumptions based on what you think vs science who've studied this for years. Do you think these statements would be put out if they just basically glance at it? They don't just say, oh here you go, I know all this after one day. It's years of studying and putting pieces together.
So how are you right over science? You assume because everything is so complex then it must be some type of ? involved, that's your level of thought. How is that backing up or even making a decent argument? What actual proof do you have? How can you out do science in the name of an 'intelligent designer'? -
You're making assumptions based on what you think vs science who've studied this for years. Do you think these statements would be put out if they just basically glance at it? They don't just say, oh here you go, I know all this after one day. It's years of studying and putting pieces together.
So how are you right over science? You assume because everything is so complex then it must be some type of ? involved, that's your level of thought. How is that backing up or even making a decent argument? What actual proof do you have? How can you out do science in the name of an 'intelligent designer'?
So basically, you didn't read what I posted. ok. -
PLASTIC RULES wrote: »Damn I hit these ? with dat factual knowledge and they all scurry now b.
kinda like what you did yesterday, right?
anyway, this is nothing but conjecture, where is your evidence? -
PLASTIC RULES wrote: »Good post but our intelligence is limited by the human experience. Of course at this point in time our creations will look "simple" compared to those seen in nature. One factor you fail to consider is that natural systems appear to require no input from external "intelligent" sources in order to function as they were designed to, whereas when we create something it requires our direct input. (i.e. natural systems build on themselves and are bound to certain fundamental laws, thus they would indeed appear "sloppy" opposed to our creations wherein we can control almost every aspect, make corrections as we go, etc.)
The central crux of my argument is that natural systems build upon themselves based on natural laws requiring no external intellect. This results is overly complex designs. Since we see these types of design everywhere we look it is reasonable to conclude the universe was created without external intellect. -
PLASTIC RULES wrote: »So basically, you didn't read what I posted. ok.
What did you post? You posted your thoughts, your opinions based on NO facts and a quote from a guy who you think backs up your posts.
Again, evidence? -
All theorys.Aint got no proof looking ass ? .
-
Hyde Parke wrote: »kinda like what you did yesterday, right?
anyway, this is nothing but conjecture, where is your evidence?
Humanity is the evidence. -
I can go on and on with this line, but you know what the obvious answer is...you just fail to admit it.
as im sure u already heard from believers, ? is eternal. He created EVERYTHING including time. Therefore He exists outside of time, therefore he has no beginning nor end. I think this is what science refers to as ENERGY. So yall believe in the same concept, u just label it different. -
Go figure... wrote: »as im sure u already heard from believers, ? is eternal. He created EVERYTHING including time. Therefore He exists outside of time, therefore he has no beginning nor end. I think this is what science refers to as ENERGY. So yall believe in the same concept, u just label it different.
Same stuff I be saying all the time. Guess it takes someone else from the Go to say it too. -
I have a question
People that are anti-creation/pro-evolution correct me if i'm wrong you believe that everything is the by-product of a massive explosion of energy correct?
this doesn't explain who or what caused the explosion to start off said evolution
One of the 99 attributes or Names of Allah is Al-Bari (59:24) The Evolver so Islam is not in disagreement with all of creation evolving and being perfected over time but it was created by an Intelligent Designer, how else can you explain everything even existing for so long to begin with? Look around you and point to completely random accidental occurrences that not only survive but go on to dominate and thrive.
Wa alaykum -
This sounds like a reference to the popularized "Big Bang theory". The problem with calling the theory of the origin of the universe's continuing expansion the "Big Bang theory" is that it assumes a singularity of some sort; which is where the speculation begins. It could have easily been a "Big Contraction and Re-Expansion"--which reached no single point--instead (aka the "Big Bounce" theory).supaman4321 wrote: »I have a question
People that are anti-creation/pro-evolution correct me if i'm wrong you believe that everything is the by-product of a massive explosion of energy correct?
this doesn't explain who or what caused the explosion to start off said evolution
...
So, it'd be a bit unwise for someone to wholeheartedly assume that the universe's continuing expansion could've only started with a "massive explosion of energy".
But yeh, many believe that if there were an "explosion", it was caused by quantum fluctuations. -
fiat_money wrote: »This sounds like a reference to the popularized "Big Bang theory". The problem with calling the theory of the origin of the universe's continuing expansion the "Big Bang theory" is that it assumes a singularity of some sort; which is where the speculation begins. It could have easily been a "Big Contraction and Re-Expansion"--which reached no single point--instead (aka the "Big Bounce" theory).
So, it'd be a bit unwise for someone to wholeheartedly assume that the universe's continuing expansion could've only started with a "massive explosion of energy".
But yeh, many believe that if there were an "explosion", it was caused by quantum fluctuations.
Which do you think is more likely and why? -
Imo there is some underlying something. It seems ridiculous to me that complex beings developed/evolved without some sort of blueprint. Things appear to build upon one another, that couldn't happen if it wasn't following some specific 'order'. But are the blueprints intelligence or signs of it? It's some kind of smart cuz we can't replicate everything we've discovered.
-
BiblicalAtheist wrote: »Imo there is some underlying something. It seems ridiculous to me that complex beings developed/evolved without some sort of blueprint. Things appear to build upon one another, that couldn't happen if it wasn't following some specific 'order'. But are the blueprints intelligence or signs of it? It's some kind of smart cuz we can't replicate everything we've discovered.
Yep. You let em off easy. Next time just tell them they are stupid. -
If we can heal ourselves from afflictions and ailments(if not in the chronic stage), such as Kidney stones, tumors, asthma and a host of other ailments by a combination of fasting, strict diet, vigorous exercise, and maintaining a focused mental regiment based off the internal and external knowledge we possess, this tells me that we are a product of intelligent design.
Basically, what this boils down to is people wanting to act like ? and devils, without fear of reckoning for what they do. Most who take that stance are regurgitating the unproven theories of someone who admits in technical terms that he doesn't know what the ? he is talking about.
Trust me, Cause and Effect are the guiding principles of the religion of the Universe. It stands true alone without any need for proof.
Knowledge is priceless, Wisdom is twice that..................... -
And you're basing that assumption on.............???
Keep in mind humans have been around for around 6 million years. It happened in stages. Its not like ? ! Here we are.
The homosapien species has been around for millions of years bro. More than enough time. Nobody has claimed anything happened over night.
th
Word. Your intergalactic alien brain coupled with your pentium 3trillion processor chip in that genius brain of yours that produces such comments as "HUmans were made by Intelligent Design cuz it take a long ass time to be so smart" has clearly taken me off my game LOL
Yes please educate us oh wise one. Prove those PhD, astrophysicists and anthropologists (who've actually studied the ? subject sometimes for decades) wrong.
Show the Worldwide Web that an IC poster named PLASTIC RULES can shake the very foundation of the scientific world with the power of the SuperNova he calls a brain. -_-
We're listening......
wow.. ur cold man. lol -
nobody knows. the truth of the matter is not one of us knows for sure. im not so sure it even matters. we have no recollection of our birth, we dont know the day of our impending demise, so i wonder just how relevant knowing if their is an intelligent designer is. Imo, if the creator, if there is one, felt it that important, we would know, there wouldnt be any doubt or confusion, speculation, or one side against the other. you would just know, it wouldnt be up for debate. this here, is a waste of our time, because we werent meant to know, and those who say they do, then they wouldnt need to argue the point. I think , and this is my opinion, that we just get bored and find things to excercise our brains, knowing we really dont care that much if the things we debate are true or not.
-
Hyde Parke wrote: »nobody knows. the truth of the matter is not one of us knows for sure. im not so sure it even matters. we have no recollection of our birth, we dont know the day of our impending demise, so i wonder just how relevant knowing if their is an intelligent designer is. Imo, if the creator, if there is one, felt it that important, we would know, there wouldnt be any doubt or confusion, speculation, or one side against the other. you would just know, it wouldnt be up for debate. this here, is a waste of our time, because we werent meant to know, and those who say they do, then they wouldnt need to argue the point. I think , and this is my opinion, that we just get bored and find things to excercise our brains, knowing we really dont care that much if the things we debate are true or not.
i made this thread cuz i was in essay writing mode.
whereas darxwell came in here with a thesis because he catches feelins everytime someone mentions intelligent design. that ? got a brain the size of an orange and chipmunk teef.
