Evolution of the evolution threads...

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Intelligent Design has as a basic assumption that people can intuitively tell whether something has been designed. Can God design something and people would not be able to tell it had been designed? If so, ID is wrong...which it is!

There are a lot of issues with just the word design.
I can throw coins on my desk, they are there by design because I
threw them there, but the exact placement of the coins not so much;
however, I can also take each coin turn them so that heads are facing
up and all of the heads pointing a certain direction in a pattern to my
choosing. Design can be vague or not, but intent is the thing that
we need to concern ourselves with, can we see this pattern without
intent of purpose behind it, or can chance under the laws of the
universe just give us these things we see today?
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Who told you God was designed, or had a beginning?
Kelly

Nobody -and that is not what he said nor implied -read his post again -it is perfectly logical -his argument is very implicitly of the “IF X then Y but IF not X then not Y” kind (even though he didn’t explicitly use the “IF” word) but he doesn’t say whether X is true or false.

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
Nobody -and that is not what he said nor implied -read his post again -it is perfectly logical -his argument is very implicitly of the “IF X then Y but IF not X then not Y” kind (even though he didn’t explicitly use the “IF” word) but he doesn’t say whether X is true or false.

It is an apples and oranges debate again, the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not. So the truth about
something that has a start and one that does not, puts them into
different categories altogether so the comparisons are meaningless.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
It is an apples and oranges debate again, the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not. So the truth about
something that has a start and one that does not, puts them into
different categories altogether so the comparisons are meaningless.
Kelly

…the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not.......

What “reasoning” leads you to believe that “God” cannot have a beginning?
-answer: no “reasoning” -just blind faith in what the Bible says.

Thus your assertion that only one but not the other must have a beginning has no rational bases.

Originally posted by KellyJay
It is an apples and oranges debate again, the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning,

Not everybody reckons that the universe has a beginning, and it has already been shown in other threads that what such a beginning constitutes if it existed is under dispute.
If it was shown that the universe did not have a beginning, would you concede that the argument that the complexity of the universe implies design would then have no merit?

Originally posted by KellyJay
There are a lot of issues with just the word design.
I can throw coins on my desk, they are there by design because I
threw them there, but the exact placement of the coins not so much;
however, I can also take each coin turn them so that heads are facing
up and all of the heads pointing a certain direction in a pattern to my
choosing. Design can be va ...[text shortened]... t, or can chance under the laws of the
universe just give us these things we see today?
Kelly

Are you able to give a definition for 'intent'. For example if a pattern is formed due to a simple rule being followed such a is the case in the formation of crystals (snow flakes), or the Mandel bro set, then do we call the rule 'intent'? Or is there more to it? What more?

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
[b]…the universe by everyone's
reckoning has a beginning, while God does not.......

What “reasoning” leads you to believe that “God” cannot have a beginning?
-answer: no “reasoning” -just blind faith in what the Bible says.

Thus your assertion that only one but not the other must have a beginning has no rational bases.[/b]

Scripture
Kelly

Originally posted by twhitehead
Not everybody reckons that the universe has a beginning, and it has already been shown in other threads that what such a beginning constitutes if it existed is under dispute.
If it was shown that the universe did not have a beginning, would you concede that the argument that the complexity of the universe implies design would then have no merit?

They were put forward as an statements of how things could be..."shown" is quite another thing altogether, you are quite the
person of faith. Do you really think that when you explain your side of
an issue that just ends the debate and everyone who then disagree is
either then a liar or plain stupid?
Kelly

Originally posted by twhitehead
Are you able to give a definition for 'intent'. For example if a pattern is formed due to a simple rule being followed such a is the case in the formation of crystals (snow flakes), or the Mandel bro set, then do we call the rule 'intent'? Or is there more to it? What more?

Do yourself a favor, I know you are so use to using non=standard
uses of words, but try looking up regular standard uses of words so
that you have a clue what other people are saying to you. Than you
may not be so apt to call people liars like you seem to do.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Scripture
Kelly

-exactly! -no “reasoning” nor rational bases -just blind faith in what the Bible says.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Scripture
Kelly

Religion, not science. What did I think?

http://web.archive.org/web/20060428091222/http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

Originally posted by Andrew Hamilton
-exactly! -no “reasoning” nor rational bases -just blind faith in what the Bible says.

Actually, not true, I had to reason it out, I'm still reasoning it out.
Simply because I questioned what people told me was true, and
came to realize they were just assuming they had their ducks in
a row does not mean I didn't or don't spend time thinking these
things through. It isn't blind faith, it is no more blind faith than
what you have when you tell me you know what happened billions
of years ago by looking at a light beam.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Actually, not true, I had to reason it out, I'm still reasoning it out.
Simply because I questioned what people told me was true, and
came to realize they were just assuming they had their ducks in
a row does not mean I didn't or don't spend time thinking these
things through. It isn't blind faith, it is no more blind faith than
what you have when you tell me you know what happened billions
of years ago by looking at a light beam.
Kelly

Exactly what is your line of “reasoning” that has lead you to conclude that the literal interpretation of everything Bible says is true if it isn’t just faith?

And exactly what is your line of “reasoning” that has lead you to conclude that the belief in any scientific facts that contradicts your interpretation of the Bible is just “blind faith”? (such as the logical conclusions from observing such things as the Doppler effect etc).

Originally posted by Diodorus Siculus
http://web.archive.org/web/20060428091222/http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

There is defiantly some trolls on these forums.
Some employ the tactic of trying to piss everybody off by either not answering questions or not giving a straight answers to questions put to them usually by pretending the question put to them is a question that is actually different from the actual question put to them but sounds vaguely like the same question -in other words, they put words into other people’s mouths.