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.
Fundamental to the Intelligent Design question is the matter of a designer.
That's the creationist's problem, not mine. Anyone can look at post-fact evidence and brew up a hypothesis. Tell us how to falsify your hypothesis, and we can start using the tools of science on it. So far, I have yet to encounter any ID proponent who could come up with falsification criteria for theit idea - will you take a swing at it?
In order for finite time and definable space to exist in the present, they must have come to exist at a definable starting point in the past, and since nothing begets nothing, something independent of both time and space must have first existed to create finite time and definable space.
Without that, there is no here because there is no other place by which we may define here and now never arrives as the approaching moment is forever lost in eternity past.
I agree that nothing can come from nothing, and decided long ago that God spoke all of this into existence (intelligent design). "Let there be" WAS the Big Bang. People ask "if God made all this, then who made God?" There are just some things we can't wrap our heads around. It's like talking about a billion dollars and having a billion dollars; two entirely different realities.
I agree that nothing can come from nothing, and decided long ago that God spoke all of this into existence (intelligent design). "Let there be" WAS the Big Bang. People ask "if God made all this, then who made God?" There are just some things we can't wrap our heads around. It's like talking about a billion dollars and having a billion dollars; two entirely different realities.
Why don't you present your "evidence of a 4 and half billion year old earth, instead of making up straw men concerning Harrier?
Well there is radiocarbon dating that can date organic material back 60,000 years that blows out the 'Earth is only 5,000 years old' theory. I take it you don't believe that radiometric dating truly, accurately reports age as far back as billions of years?
I agree that nothing can come from nothing, and decided long ago that God spoke all of this into existence (intelligent design). "Let there be" WAS the Big Bang. People ask "if God made all this, then who made God?" There are just some things we can't wrap our heads around. It's like talking about a billion dollars and having a billion dollars; two entirely different realities.
Well there is radiocarbon dating that can date organic material back 60,000 years that blows out the 'Earth is only 5,000 years old' theory. I take it you don't believe that radiometric dating truly, accurately reports age as far back as billions of years?
Yes. And no-one is claiming otherwise. You received several answers about what life on earth evolved from. (It's IDers who claim that a designer "designed" everything from nothing.)
Well good for you- go do some research on the natural causes then. Here, this may help start you off:
But the thread is about the imperfect 'design' in the human body which debunks the idea of intelligent design and supports evolution. Do you have anything to add to the discussion?
No, you aren't even trying to discuss the OP's video about the imperfect 'design' of the human body. You are trying to derail the thread.
You don't get to ignore the topic of the thread - which is about the imperfect 'design' of the human body which debunks the idea of intelligent design and supports evolution. Do you have anything to add to the discussion?
Lot's of assumptions there. Go watch Lawrence Krauss talk about 'nothing'.
No one other than creationists use that straw man and claim that scientists say "everything came from nothing". They don't.
But that's still not the topic of the thread which is about the imperfect 'design' of the human body which debunks the idea of intelligent design and supports evolution. Do you have anything to add to this discussion?
Enter the religion of Atheism...
"What we've discovered is our Universe's energy appears it could be zero."
~ Lawrence Krauss
Yes, it "could be zero" by tweaking the right combination of fudge factors (see MOND, CDM, DM and DE).
Now, if we can just invent a way to send negative energy to the opposite universe, we could replace the internal combustion engines in our cars with perpetual motion machines!
So its not OK to "invent a god to explain what we don't yet understand", but fudge factors are fine?
Seems poster child for the Raped by a Priest Foundation, Lawrence Krauss, is still carrying a little negative energy of his own.
Until something approaching a consistent theory on the origin of the Universe that isn't self-contradictory and dependent on one or more fudge factors comes along, jumping ahead to argue other matters is a fool's errand.
A zero energy non-static Universe that has always existed is self-contradictory and a religious invention in support of Atheism.
On the other hand, a Universe with a beginning requires a cause and nothing cannot be the cause of something.
Logic requires something to exist that is unbound by the restrains to which the rest of existence must adhere.
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.
