Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The argument seems to be that the universe is too complex to be anything other than a act of creation, a designed plan, that random chance could not have played any part in what is. And even more interesting is that the solar system was designed to support intelligent life. So what demonstrates design in, let's say, our solar system. Is it the unequal distance, and size of the planets? The seemingly random number of moons that the planets possess? What would indicate elements of design?
The argument seems to be that the universe is too complex to be anything other than a act of creation, a designed plan, that random chance could not have played any part in what is. And even more interesting is that the solar system was designed to support intelligent life. So what demonstrates design in, let's say, our solar system. Is it the unequal distance, and size of the planets? The seemingly random number of moons that the planets possess? What would indicate elements of design?
It's the underlying tenets, laws, parameters and such of the universe that indicate design. No one claims G-d said this planet goes here, that one there, like an interior designer placing lamps and rugs.
Much has been written about the incredibly tight constraints on any number of molecular level elements without which life could not exist. Avail yourself of those resources would be my suggestion.
Who or what said gravity had to exist at all, for example. You presume much because of its existence, but don't explain why it is, or had to be.
We should not presume that any person can explain the rationale or purpose behind G-d's design. You ask too much. It's beyond comprehension.
It's the underlying tenets, laws, parameters and such of the universe that indicate design. No one claims G-d said this planet goes here, that one there, like an interior designer placing lamps and rugs.
Much has been written about the incredibly tight constraints on any number of molecular level elements without which life could not exist. Avail yourself of those resources would be my suggestion.
Who or what said gravity had to exist at all, for example. You presume much because of its existence, but don't explain why it is, or had to be.
We should not presume that any person can explain the rationale or purpose behind G-d's design. You ask too much. It's beyond comprehension.
There's also this argument that the earth is just at the right distance, the moon the right size and distance and everything is just right to allow life to develop. It's a persuasive argument. It's the same as your point about the constraints on a number of molecular level elements. If one buys into that as a sign of Intelligent design then reading up more of them would only pile up yet more of the same evidence.
It is really the mindset one has. There is this idea of saying that the earth and surroundings had to be just so to produce life. Or one can say that life was produced because the conditions were just right for life, or that kind of life. There are many resources explaining that approach which you might like to consult -just to see the other side of the argument.
There is also the point that life if it can't adapt to the changing conditions, becomes extinct. It is because that happened a couple of times that we are here. Similarly, if a chemical combination doesn't work you won't find it. It isn't there because someone decided it would work.
With the 'puddle is the right shape to fill a hole because the hole is that shape' approach, the one valid point you made about the constraints don't have the same punch, though I agree that we have won the lottery. Somebody had to.
There's also this argument that the earth is just at the right distance, the moon the right size and distance and everything is just right to allow life to develop. It's a persuasive argument. It's the same as your point about the constraints on a number of molecular level elements. If one buys into that as a sign of Intelligent design then reading up more of them would only pile up yet more of the same evidence.
It is really the mindset one has. There is this idea of saying that the earth and surroundings had to be just so to produce life. Or one can say that life was produced because the conditions were just right for life, or that kind of life. There are many resources explaining that approach which you might like to consult -just to see the other side of the argument.
There is also the point that life if it can't adapt to the changing conditions, becomes extinct. It is because that happened a couple of times that we are here. Similarly, if a chemical combination doesn't work you won't find it. It isn't there because someone decided it would work.
With the 'puddle is the right shape to fill a hole because the hole is that shape' approach, the one valid point you made about the constraints don't have the same punch, though I agree that we have won the lottery. Somebody had to.
Well actually, are you quite sure SOMEBODY had to win? You presume so, but it is not necessarily the case that life, of one kind of another, HAD to exist. Even if it might be completely foreign to our understanding of basic biology, there is no law that says life is required.
The argument that because we exist, we must have therefore have drawn the lucky numbers, presupposes there are many different possible forms of life, we just got lucky. I'm not a scientist but it seems the conditions under which life can exist are not so many - unless one theorizes that intelligent life can be of a nature so vastly different from our own that we cannot even comprehend it. There is no scientific proof of this - to the contrary in fact. It would be a faith based POV.
A universe in which th rules are so different yet some kind of life, intelligent or otherwise, exists, seems more like sci fie than sci fact.
We have no evidence that intelligent life, on our level, can exist under extreme conditions such as are found in our planets furthest reaches, or on other far away planets. Truly intelligent life cannot form in deep sea underwater vents, for example, as far as we can tell, or in extreme cold or heat.
The universe is extremely inhospitable to life beyond earth, so far as we know. While that knowledge could change one day, until it does I'd say the odds are pretty good we are here more than just because of pure damn good luck.
The argument seems to be that the universe is too complex to be anything other than a act of creation, a designed plan, that random chance could not have played any part in what is. And even more interesting is that the solar system was designed to support intelligent life. So what demonstrates design in, let's say, our solar system. Is it the unequal distance, and size of the planets? The seemingly random number of moons that the planets possess? What would indicate elements of design?
How about the fact that it exists at all? Do you have an alternative explanation for the existence of matter? Space?
The argument seems to be that the universe is too complex to be anything other than a act of creation, a designed plan, that random chance could not have played any part in what is. And even more interesting is that the solar system was designed to support intelligent life. So what demonstrates design in, let's say, our solar system. Is it the unequal distance, and size of the planets? The seemingly random number of moons that the planets possess? What would indicate elements of design?
If you open your eyes you will see that it's EVERYTHING that exists that is designed.
The universe is extremely inhospitable to life beyond earth, so far as we know. While that knowledge could change one day, until it does I'd say the odds are pretty good we are here more than just because of pure damn good luck.
Hypothetical types of biochemistry. And NASA has found a new kind of life. "Instead of using phosphorus, the newly discovered microorganism—called GFAJ-1 and found in Mono Lake, California—uses the poisonous arsenic for its building blocks." NASA Finds New Life (Updated) Who knows what weird and wonderful kinds of life has yet do be discovered on the Earth not to mention the whole universe.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
