U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-14-2010, 11:33 PM
 
Location: Richland, Washington
4,070 posts, read 4,964,859 times
Reputation: 2477

Advertisements

When creationists claim that evolution is false, they often say that life is to complex to have arisen without divine intervention. This is a problematic argument though. Evolution has withstood 150 years of rigorous empirical testing and has always been proven to be true.

Flaw #1: When creationists claim design, they are never able to provide evidence for such a claim. What they're really saying is that they look at something such as the Grand Canyon and see how beautiful it is, and then are not able to understand how life could have arisen through natural(meaning nonsupernatural for those who want to claim I'm using the natural 'just is' argument) processes. They don't understand that evidence comes from scientific testing.

Flaw #2: The Design argument is immune to disproof. Creationists claim that the design argument is scientific, but their core concept(god) is undetectable by empirical testing.

Flaw #3: Another flaw is that they compare two completely unrelated phenomena. The first is man made(usually a watch), the second is natural phenomena(the world). They assume that the two work the same, but they don't. Another problem with this argument is that you can go to see the watchmaker to learn how he/she makes the watch, but you can't go to God's magic universe factory.

I'm sure others can think of more flaws, but here's a start.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-15-2010, 01:06 AM
 
Location: Valencia, Spain
13,842 posts, read 9,648,146 times
Reputation: 2391
"I imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, ‘This is an interesting world I find myself in’ an interesting hole I find myself in, ’fits me rather neatly, doesn’t it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!"
-- Douglas Adams.

The truth, as we know, is that the puddle fits the hole not the other way around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 11:28 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,062,995 times
Reputation: 3717
Well stated, Rafi. Short and to the point. I'm really tired of that ill-thought-out "We're perfect, and this world is perfect for us, therefore it had to be designed that way!" nonsense. Why is it so hard to realize that we fit it perfectly precisely because we evolved to fit it perfectly? The "imperfect fitters" didn't survive, leaving only the "better fits" to carry on.

We're all evolutionary transitionals, a word that Intransigent Dogmo-Theists hate to hear. Why? Because it implies an unfinished, ongoing design evolution, not the completed, perfect Godly version. So sorry; our recent ability to monitor exact DNA sequences, as well as that of our ancestors back a few thousand years, shows distinct genetic "drift" and specific improvements. Proven, not speculated.

(BTW, I expect a full-blown and well-orchestrated attack on DNA genome sequencing soon after the Christians truly realize it spells the death-knell for many of their long-held beliefs about the origins of man and the so-called lesser "beasts". It's truly the truth incarnate about a lot of concepts they've held inviolate those many long years of relative scientific illiteracy and fear-mongering. Watch for it!)

Of course, we humans, supposedly the ultimate pinnacle of God's design capabilities, are a sorry lot when you look at the details, far less well adapted than the dinosaurs were (we've been here but a few million years, they having existed for 180 million, but were wiped out by a simple and unavoidable catastrophic event which will in all likelihood repeat itself sometime in our future history...). They vanished not because they were a bad fit. They'd have surely out-competed us if we'd been "insta-poofed" into their world.

"Snap. Gulp. Yum!" Next!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 08:19 PM
 
3,614 posts, read 2,951,040 times
Reputation: 909
One of the problems one runs into in claiming design is being able to differentiate from design, non-design, and perceived design. Does this creator create every individual snowflake? Their structures are perfect. Yet a physical process exists to form this perfect crystal.

If this premise is accepted, why is human descent excepted?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2010, 11:35 AM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,616 posts, read 11,062,995 times
Reputation: 3717
It's generally a complete ignorance of how those few simple principles produce the illusion of a so-called "perfect design". Snowflakes form not because God sits at His Heavenly Control Panel, frantically throttling up and down for each an every sub-atomic particle in the universe and beyond (logically impossible, BTW), but simply because, as H2O solidifies according to a standard law of it's temperature-controlled phase shift, it wants to organize itself in certain physical ways.

"Oh lordy lordy; it must be DESIGN!"

Nope. Just simple molecular interaction and physics. Now, as to who or what caused those simple laws to be in place, we really don't know (aside from some evolving theories), and shouldn't assume. We simply don't know yet (one time in our dark and illiterate past, we didn't know the Earth was round either, or that the planets revolved around the sun), but so far all the attributions to God have been rather easily dismissed, and so why stop there. Let's at least suspect that there's alternate possibilities to further Godly involvement, because the evidence for Him is now, officially, pretty scanty.

Unless, of course, you need or choose to believe in Him. Then, a whole other set of factors come into play, but Objectivity is certainly not one of them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2010, 04:04 PM
 
18 posts, read 19,496 times
Reputation: 10
Unless people are afaid of truth, then i believe everyone should see these seminars Creation Science Evangelism | Browsing Media Categories (http://www.drdino.com/media-categories.php?c=seminars&v=10 - broken link)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2010, 04:39 PM
 
37,477 posts, read 25,224,572 times
Reputation: 5853
Quote:
Originally Posted by rifleman View Post
It's generally a complete ignorance of how those few simple principles produce the illusion of a so-called "perfect design". Snowflakes form not because God sits at His Heavenly Control Panel, frantically throttling up and down for each an every sub-atomic particle in the universe and beyond (logically impossible, BTW), but simply because, as H2O solidifies according to a standard law of it's temperature-controlled phase shift, it wants to organize itself in certain physical ways.

"Oh lordy lordy; it must be DESIGN!"

Nope. Just simple molecular interaction and physics. Now, as to who or what caused those simple laws to be in place, we really don't know (aside from some evolving theories), and shouldn't assume. We simply don't know yet (one time in our dark and illiterate past, we didn't know the Earth was round either, or that the planets revolved around the sun), but so far all the attributions to God have been rather easily dismissed, and so why stop there. Let's at least suspect that there's alternate possibilities to further Godly involvement, because the evidence for Him is now, officially, pretty scanty.

Unless, of course, you need or choose to believe in Him. Then, a whole other set of factors come into play, but Objectivity is certainly not one of them.
Rifleman, rifleman . . . you and konraden still playing with the Creationist kiddies? Why do you always abandon the serious discussions that expose the flaws in your assumptions and "taken for granteds" and "It just is" . . . etc.? That is rhetorical . . . I know you do that so you can make the outrageous and unsubstantiatable claim of scanty evidence for God in the emerging designs and changes in the universe based on His "laws" and "codes."Someone needs a re-education about what comprises objectivity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2010, 04:42 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,038 posts, read 30,671,240 times
Reputation: 12213
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD View Post
Rifleman, rifleman . . . you and konraden still playing with the Creationist kiddies? Why do you always abandon the serious discussions that expose the flaws in your assumptions and "taken for granteds" and "It just is" . . . etc.? That is rhetorical . . . I know you do that so you can make the outrageous and unsubstantiatable claim of scanty evidence for God in the emerging designs and changes in the universe based on His "laws" and "codes."Someone needs a re-education about what comprises objectivity.
Exactly, but that someone is not Rifleman or konraden.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2010, 04:59 PM
 
37,477 posts, read 25,224,572 times
Reputation: 5853
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
Exactly, but that someone is not Rifleman or konraden.
DO tell. How exactly does ignoring and refusing to acknowledge or explain the source of control in the universe . . . all the while denying the existence of a source . . . constitute retaining an open and objective mind?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2010, 05:33 PM
 
31,385 posts, read 31,051,757 times
Reputation: 14878
Quote:
Originally Posted by methodmatriarch View Post
Unless people are afaid of truth, then i believe everyone should see these seminars Creation Science Evangelism | Browsing Media Categories (http://www.drdino.com/media-categories.php?c=seminars&v=10 - broken link)
It started off as being mildly entertaining, and then rapidly descended into one of the scariest presentations that I have ever witnessed. Even in fear of sounding hyperbolic, it was akin to some Nazi propaganda film.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top