Originally posted by FetchmyjunkAre you saying the "ingredients" were in fact already there and were not created by this "intelligent mechanism"? This "intelligent mechanism" had to work with existing materials and created life out of those?
More like ingredients + intelligent mechanism = life. As opposed to ingredients + time + stupid random processes = life.
Also, you understand that at some point you're going to have to come up with an explanation for the existence of this "intelligent mechanism", right?
I don't believe that all of this could have been accidental. An atheist may get tired of hearing about a God, but a believer can also get tired of hearing about 'given a billions years, it could happen'.
Gravity, the magnetic field, the distance of the sun and moon, the atmosphere, and the complex nature of the human body. All of this *combined* doesn't seem to be an accident. And if it was accidental......are we to just throw in the added element of accidental food?
Just because the human body was seemingly an accident to some theories.......food was NOT a requirement to sustain this accident. The trivial fact that food grows out of the ground and off trees to sustain human life.....was that also part of the accident? At exactly the time human life just *happened*, potatoes and bananas just started growing?
I just think that too, too many things have happened for all of it to be accidental. The earth seems to be 'designed' for life, and to sustain life.
Originally posted by chaney3Who's saying "all of this" could have been "accidental"?
I don't believe that all of this could have been accidental. An atheist may get tired of hearing about a God, but a believer can also get tired of hearing about 'given a billions years, it could happen'.
Gravity, the magnetic field, the distance of the sun and moon, the atmosphere, and the complex nature of the human body. All of this *combined* doesn't ...[text shortened]... for all of it to be accidental. The earth seems to be 'designed' for life, and to sustain life.
Originally posted by chaney3And it appears you got tired in science class too. That doesn't make you right. You need a better counter argument than 'I'm tired'.
An atheist may get tired of hearing about a God, but a believer can also get tired of hearing about 'given a billions years, it could happen'.
.....are we to just throw in the added element of accidental food?
Classic.
At exactly the time human life just *happened*, potatoes and bananas just started growing?
No. What gave you that idea? Even Genesis has the bananas first.
I just think that too, too many things have happened for all of it to be accidental.
Well given that you apparently don't know much about what happened your opinion doesn't count for much.
The earth seems to be 'designed' for life, and to sustain life.
'Seems' being the key word.
I also note that none of what you have said is an actual challenge to my OP. My OP refers specifically to explicit probability calculations not wild hand waving in ignorance.
Originally posted by Great King Rat
It also seems rather well designed for horrible death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_natural_disasters_by_death_toll
It also seems rather well designed for horrible death.
A non-optimal design is still a design.
A design which causes you some unhappiness towards the designer, is still a design.
So the cancer, the parasites, the starvation and other unpleasant things in the biosphere don't make random, undirected, purposeless evolution necessarily more likely.
And since this is the Spirititualality Forum, I may freely contribute a biblical tenet of the Fall. Something may have gone wrong with the design for some other reason.
Now on the side, on all the many pages over the years of the Science Forum have you ever known twhitehead to have dedicated a thread or a post to explaining probability analysis in abiogenesis ? Has anyone of you guys who complain about Intelligent Design dedicated a thread to abiogenesis and Probability ?
Originally posted by Great King Rat
I believe the politically correct term is not "God" but "intelligent mechanism".
Babies get killed by an "intelligent mechanism".
Please, KN, keep up with the correct lingo.
Babies get killed by an "intelligent mechanism".
That's like in the 60s they referred to an Atomic Bomb as "a device."
Political correctness has been with us for a long time.
Please notice readers. There will likely be a shortage of discussion of Probability and an encreased number of statements showing resentment concerning God if He be believed as the Designer of the biosphere.
The probability question morphs into "Well, we don't like your God designer. We could have done better."
A non-optimal design or a design that you don't like is still a design.
Originally posted by sonshipBut he didn't say it was a non-optimal design. He said it appeared to be designed for a specific purpose - horrible death.
A non-optimal design is still a design.
So the question now, is can anyone come up with probability argument for whether or not the earth was designed to cause horrible death to human beings. Certainly the intricate and highly sophisticated workings of the AIDS virus or any number of other horrible diseases should convince just about any theists that they were designed.
And since this is the Spirititualality Forum, I may freely contribute a biblical tenet of the Fall. Something may have gone wrong with the design for some other reason.
So would you care to answer my poll? Do you think the AIDS virus was designed, and if so by whom?
I notice that your statement above implies that God designed the universe and then there was an accident. Was it a random accident or a designed accident? Did something 'go wrong on purpose'?
Now on the side, on all the many pages over the years of the Science Forum have you ever known twhitehead to have dedicated a thread or a post to explaining probability analysis in abiogenesis ? Has anyone of you guys who complain about Intelligent Design dedicated a thread to abiogenesis and Probability ?
Hilarious how you keep repeating this like it demonstrates something.
Originally posted by sonshipWe can keep talking probability for as long as you like, but I notice a distinct shortage of people willing to put forward an argument based on an actual explicit probability calculation. All I see is lots of hand waving.
Please notice readers. There will likely be a shortage of discussion of Probability .....