Precision in Nature: Evidence of God or Accidents?

[PoliticalChic]

This is acceptable...and would have avoided what proceeded from your neg rep which began "I don\'t believe you\'ve even looked at the einstein field equations, so how would you know?"

Well you haven't, so how would you? You haven't even looked at the basis of the theory, and yet you shoot it down based on its philosophical implications! That's kind of like someone saying they hate the game of baseball without ever even watching a game or knowing the rules.

I fight my battles in public. I hope you will as well in the future.

So PoliticalChic is your real name?

You should not assume that others know less than you do.

I'm not assuming. You DO know less than me about physics. You can't even write down the Einstein field equation.

"Well you haven't, so how would you? You haven't even looked at the basis of the theory, and yet you shoot it down based on its philosophical implications!"

You just won the award for 'Unintentional Humor."
Don't you realize that the theory is a phony attempt to avoid the possibility that that there is a God behind the creation of the universe?


You probably don't even understand that scientists have even produced theories that aliens from outer space brought life here.

"Prof Chandra Wickramasinghe, of Cardiff University, said new research "overwhelmingly" supported the view that human life started from outside our Earth.
The Astrobiologist said the first "seeds of life" were deposited on our plant from space 3,800m years ago.
He claimed microbes from outer space arrived on earth..."
All humans are 'aliens from outer space', scientist claims - Telegraph


Of course I know- and understand- far more than you.
You are an ignorant fellow.

 

[code1211]

Faith is the substance of things hoped for evidence of things not seen. Without faith nothing is believed there unseen therefore without faith science of finding something not yet discovered is dead to start.

The faith of a scientist is based on the observation of what he can see and the belief that cause and effect will be constant.

The faith of the religious is based on what cannot be observed and the belief that a reward awaits.

It's the same word but not the same thing.

 

[code1211]

God promised pain in child birth and sometimes unfortunately women die during child birth,heck some people pass on while on the toilet you want to blame God for that to ?

I think the point here is that this demonstrates one or more of a couple things:

The design to "Harvest" a baby from the womb is not a good one if it is both painful and sometimes results in death to both parties.

If the designer did not anticipate this, it calls to question his intelligence.

If the designer did anticipate this, it calls to question his motivation.

If the designer did anticipate this and his motivation for the design is beyond question, then it calls to question His competence.

It was eves consequence. She made the choice

Eve was designed before she made the choice.

 

[code1211]

God promised pain in child birth and sometimes unfortunately women die during child birth,heck some people pass on while on the toilet you want to blame God for that to ?

I think the point here is that this demonstrates one or more of a couple things:

The design to "Harvest" a baby from the womb is not a good one if it is both painful and sometimes results in death to both parties.

If the designer did not anticipate this, it calls to question his intelligence.

If the designer did anticipate this, it calls to question his motivation.

If the designer did anticipate this and his motivation for the design is beyond question, then it calls to question His competence.

Sin brought forth punishment and imperfections.

We are still paying the price for the origional sin.

The designer knows the number of hairs on your body i am sure he knew what our imperfection would bring.

Other mammals have the same problems with birthing although our erect posture complicates things. We are "designed" to give birth is the same posture as other primates.

 

[code1211]

Genesis says ten times kinds bring forth after their own kind is that supported by the evidence ?

Genesis talking about succeeding generations is not a pronouncement on what started the whole rodeo out which is what I was commenting on.

It's a simple question and only has one correct answer. Why do evolutiuonist avoid answering this question ?

To be truthful, the question has been asked and answered. That you refuse to accept the answer does not make it less valid or logical.

 

[code1211]

Thank you for making an argument for design or another one of those miracles you believe in absent of a designer.

So, to be clear, you are saying that the Lord omnipotent Master of the universe created billions of Planets and only got it right one time?

As for now God has not mentioned life on other planets,the only other place he mentions where life exists other then this planet is heaven.

By the way your side agrees with me so far no life has been detected anywhere but on this planet.

And that is because of Goldilocks.

It seems odd that Billions of planets are there and that only ones has life. It would seem even more odd if there is a Creator creating as opposed to an accident of nature.

If there is one success in billions of attempts on each of billions of planets for billions of years, that would seem to more accurately lean toward the side of an accident happening than a creator creating.

 

[Youwerecreated]

What about all the imprecisions in nature? Are they evidence of a "dumb" designer?

Here is one example: autoimmune pathologies.

Here is another: cancer.

Ready?

Discuss!

No because perfection was lost with the fall of man and woman. So you are saying there are no cases of precise timing's in nature ?

You can't have it both ways. Either it's all magically created by a designer or it's not.

So you are denying precision in nature ?

God can have it both ways he created and gave only one law for humans to obey,it is true once adam sinned he new both good and evil.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Faith is the substance of things hoped for evidence of things not seen. Without faith nothing is believed there unseen therefore without faith science of finding something not yet discovered is dead to start.

The faith of a scientist is based on the observation of what he can see and the belief that cause and effect will be constant.

The faith of the religious is based on what cannot be observed and the belief that a reward awaits.

It's the same word but not the same thing.

Uh oh only microevolution has been observed not macroevolution no matter what nonsense you have been taught.

 

[Youwerecreated]

I think the point here is that this demonstrates one or more of a couple things:

The design to "Harvest" a baby from the womb is not a good one if it is both painful and sometimes results in death to both parties.

If the designer did not anticipate this, it calls to question his intelligence.

If the designer did anticipate this, it calls to question his motivation.

If the designer did anticipate this and his motivation for the design is beyond question, then it calls to question His competence.

Sin brought forth punishment and imperfections.

We are still paying the price for the origional sin.

The designer knows the number of hairs on your body i am sure he knew what our imperfection would bring.

Other mammals have the same problems with birthing although our erect posture complicates things. We are "designed" to give birth is the same posture as other primates.

Simiarity proves nothing.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Genesis talking about succeeding generations is not a pronouncement on what started the whole rodeo out which is what I was commenting on.

It's a simple question and only has one correct answer. Why do evolutiuonist avoid answering this question ?

To be truthful, the question has been asked and answered. That you refuse to accept the answer does not make it less valid or logical.

Have you seen any organism that gave birth to something other then their own kind ?

 

[code1211]

Faith is the substance of things hoped for evidence of things not seen. Without faith nothing is believed there unseen therefore without faith science of finding something not yet discovered is dead to start.

The faith of a scientist is based on the observation of what he can see and the belief that cause and effect will be constant.

The faith of the religious is based on what cannot be observed and the belief that a reward awaits.

It's the same word but not the same thing.

Uh oh only microevolution has been observed not macroevolution no matter what nonsense you have been taught.

So unless a human being can be alive for a billion years to actually view macroevolution as you call it, it doesn't exist?

Do we apply that same level of proof to the existence of God?

 

[code1211]

Sin brought forth punishment and imperfections.

We are still paying the price for the origional sin.

The designer knows the number of hairs on your body i am sure he knew what our imperfection would bring.

Other mammals have the same problems with birthing although our erect posture complicates things. We are "designed" to give birth is the same posture as other primates.

Simiarity proves nothing.

We are talking about the evidence you present for an Intelligent designer.

If you define the designer as a malevolent torture loving death advocate, the the process of birth makes sense.

The virtual sameness of the design that lends itself to more ease in the posture of the lower primates in birth calls to question the motivation of the Designer. Or His creativity.

So, which is it? Is he an incompetent designer or a malevolent and hateful designer?

 

[code1211]

It's a simple question and only has one correct answer. Why do evolutiuonist avoid answering this question ?

To be truthful, the question has been asked and answered. That you refuse to accept the answer does not make it less valid or logical.

Have you seen any organism that gave birth to something other then their own kind ?

Without putting too fine a point on this, breeding a female horse and a male donkey produces a mule.

Two distinct and recognizably different species combine to birth a third distinct and recognizable species.

These are the mechanics of evolution.

 

[Youwerecreated]

The faith of a scientist is based on the observation of what he can see and the belief that cause and effect will be constant.

The faith of the religious is based on what cannot be observed and the belief that a reward awaits.

It's the same word but not the same thing.

Uh oh only microevolution has been observed not macroevolution no matter what nonsense you have been taught.

So unless a human being can be alive for a billion years to actually view macroevolution as you call it, it doesn't exist?

Do we apply that same level of proof to the existence of God?

If my bible is the truth man diid see God. Historian Josephus ,wrote about Jesus and mentioned miracles that were witnessed by others.

Moses saw God,Lot saw God.

That is one of the most important tenets of the scientific method is to be able to observe.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Other mammals have the same problems with birthing although our erect posture complicates things. We are "designed" to give birth is the same posture as other primates.

Simiarity proves nothing.

We are talking about the evidence you present for an Intelligent designer.

If you define the designer as a malevolent torture loving death advocate, the the process of birth makes sense.

The virtual sameness of the design that lends itself to more ease in the posture of the lower primates in birth calls to question the motivation of the Designer. Or His creativity.

So, which is it? Is he an incompetent designer or a malevolent and hateful designer?

No that was punishment for eves sin he did not kill her but he did punisher her. Are we wrong to punish criminals ?

 

[Youwerecreated]

To be truthful, the question has been asked and answered. That you refuse to accept the answer does not make it less valid or logical.

Have you seen any organism that gave birth to something other then their own kind ?

Without putting too fine a point on this, breeding a female horse and a male donkey produces a mule.

Two distinct and recognizably different species combine to birth a third distinct and recognizable species.

These are the mechanics of evolution.

You bred a hybrid and that didn't answer my question.

You can't crossbreed two different famlies and get a hybrid,why ?

Besides most organisms breed to their own kind.

Why do most organisms stay with their own kind even their own breed ?

Have you noticed that most animals that have been domesticated by man do not stick to their own breed but they do stick with their own families.

 

[Not2BSubjugated]

Simiarity proves nothing.

We are talking about the evidence you present for an Intelligent designer.

If you define the designer as a malevolent torture loving death advocate, the the process of birth makes sense.

The virtual sameness of the design that lends itself to more ease in the posture of the lower primates in birth calls to question the motivation of the Designer. Or His creativity.

So, which is it? Is he an incompetent designer or a malevolent and hateful designer?

No that was punishment for eves sin he did not kill her but he did punisher her. Are we wrong to punish criminals ?

This one brings us back to the moral question of original sin. If the bible stands true, then people aren't reincarnated in different forms to live again on this Earth in Hindu fashion. Nobody who is currently alive was also alive during the time of Adam and Eve. Therefore, there's not a single woman alive today who, even if she really, -really- wanted to stop the snake from tempting Eve, or stop Eve from eating of the fruit, could have done anything about it. Every single woman alive today was completely powerless to do anything about Eve fucking up in the garden of eden.

How does a God who is infinitely wise, and loving, and just, sentence every woman to that sort of painful, often-deadly child birthing model for the crime of one woman that they were powerless to prevent?

I would say that we are not wrong to punish criminals. . . however. . . if someone commits murder, to you also imprison his children? Their children? How many generations of that persons offspring is it justifiable to punish for the crimes of their predecessor? And is it just offspring? What about siblings? Predecessors? Everybody who looks like 'em? Everybody in the same species? Should the entire human race get in line for the electric chair since, somewhere in history, there had to be -somebody- who did enough awful shit to justify the death penalty. If original sin is our model for justice, then every human should be punished for every crime committed by any human. Does this sound consistent with your view of justice?

 

[Youwerecreated]

The faith of a scientist is based on the observation of what he can see and the belief that cause and effect will be constant.

The faith of the religious is based on what cannot be observed and the belief that a reward awaits.

It's the same word but not the same thing.

Uh oh only microevolution has been observed not macroevolution no matter what nonsense you have been taught.

So unless a human being can be alive for a billion years to actually view macroevolution as you call it, it doesn't exist?

Do we apply that same level of proof to the existence of God?

Macroevolution and Microevolution are both scientific terms. Since there is no evidence for macroevolution and there is plenty of evidence for microevolution, your side extrapolate from the evidence of microevolution to make a case for macroevolution.

 

[Youwerecreated]

We are talking about the evidence you present for an Intelligent designer.

If you define the designer as a malevolent torture loving death advocate, the the process of birth makes sense.

The virtual sameness of the design that lends itself to more ease in the posture of the lower primates in birth calls to question the motivation of the Designer. Or His creativity.

So, which is it? Is he an incompetent designer or a malevolent and hateful designer?

No that was punishment for eves sin he did not kill her but he did punisher her. Are we wrong to punish criminals ?

This one brings us back to the moral question of original sin. If the bible stands true, then people aren't reincarnated in different forms to live again on this Earth in Hindu fashion. Nobody who is currently alive was also alive during the time of Adam and Eve. Therefore, there's not a single woman alive today who, even if she really, -really- wanted to stop the snake from tempting Eve, or stop Eve from eating of the fruit, could have done anything about it. Every single woman alive today was completely powerless to do anything about Eve fucking up in the garden of eden.

How does a God who is infinitely wise, and loving, and just, sentence every woman to that sort of painful, often-deadly child birthing model for the crime of one woman that they were powerless to prevent?

I would say that we are not wrong to punish criminals. . . however. . . if someone commits murder, to you also imprison his children? Their children? How many generations of that persons offspring is it justifiable to punish for the crimes of their predecessor? And is it just offspring? What about siblings? Predecessors? Everybody who looks like 'em? Everybody in the same species? Should the entire human race get in line for the electric chair since, somewhere in history, there had to be -somebody- who did enough awful shit to justify the death penalty. If original sin is our model for justice, then every human should be punished for every crime committed by any human. Does this sound consistent with your view of justice?

Because we all sin we all know good and evil and are being punished for that sin. Eves punishement passed on to to all women. Just like the snake's punishment passed on to all snakes. Just like adams punishment passed on to all men.

 

[Youwerecreated]

We are talking about the evidence you present for an Intelligent designer.

If you define the designer as a malevolent torture loving death advocate, the the process of birth makes sense.

The virtual sameness of the design that lends itself to more ease in the posture of the lower primates in birth calls to question the motivation of the Designer. Or His creativity.

So, which is it? Is he an incompetent designer or a malevolent and hateful designer?

No that was punishment for eves sin he did not kill her but he did punisher her. Are we wrong to punish criminals ?

This one brings us back to the moral question of original sin. If the bible stands true, then people aren't reincarnated in different forms to live again on this Earth in Hindu fashion. Nobody who is currently alive was also alive during the time of Adam and Eve. Therefore, there's not a single woman alive today who, even if she really, -really- wanted to stop the snake from tempting Eve, or stop Eve from eating of the fruit, could have done anything about it. Every single woman alive today was completely powerless to do anything about Eve fucking up in the garden of eden.

How does a God who is infinitely wise, and loving, and just, sentence every woman to that sort of painful, often-deadly child birthing model for the crime of one woman that they were powerless to prevent?

I would say that we are not wrong to punish criminals. . . however. . . if someone commits murder, to you also imprison his children? Their children? How many generations of that persons offspring is it justifiable to punish for the crimes of their predecessor? And is it just offspring? What about siblings? Predecessors? Everybody who looks like 'em? Everybody in the same species? Should the entire human race get in line for the electric chair since, somewhere in history, there had to be -somebody- who did enough awful shit to justify the death penalty. If original sin is our model for justice, then every human should be punished for every crime committed by any human. Does this sound consistent with your view of justice?

You are trying to compare two different judicial systems where God has a higher standard for ethics.