discipler
- Started
- Last post
- 151 Responses
- ********0
ok, cool..
So, this designer has used a fundemental particle, we might call it a string of a boson, or whatever, and an equation governing its behavior..ok, I will agree with that, semantically we are at one with that idea - there is a particle, there is an equation...
Whence they came is unknowable at this time..
Why then, would this designer then have to spookily tinker with its behavior throughout the evolution of the universe as to ensure the arrival of life and humanity ?
If this is the case, then is this not an error in His design ?
Surely if this designer is He of whom you speak, by definition infinately wise and powerful, then its within his realm to create a particle/equation that does NOT require unseen hands to guide the building of DNA, or to build mitochondria, or to create proteins from a primordeal soup.
So:
If this is the case, then this designer is not the omnipresent omnipotnent you claim.
OR
If the omnipresent omnipotent DOES exist, and is The Designer, then the ideas of intelligent design are wrong and unnecessary, and the universe did build itself by itself with no intervention.Which is it ?
Eh?
- discipler0
well version3, you obviously aren't insightful enough to see that I don't start PVN threads. I respond. You make the error of equating my response to the issue at hand with tryng to convince others. Some call this debate or dialogue. And I'm pretty certain you know how to avoid threads you don't like.
- discipler0
mikotondria, you make the presupposition that the history of life began the way you just described. This is however where all the debate lies. My position (and that of many many others) is that much of what people believe about origins is not rooted in scientific evidence. There are couple of factors to consider here: 1. We are saying that the designer created man as he is today excluding some microevolutionary adaptations which resulted from environment, diet, illness and impact of a fallen world (not originally created fallen, but this bridges into theological issues). 2. So, life did not originate from a primordial soup and there is no scientific evidence to suggest that it did.
- k770
you bay-zil, i say bah-zil
- mrdobolina0
I love how you say things like "rediculous precision with which the physical laws of our planet have been fine-tuned (a somewhat recent discovery)"
what other world are you comparing this to?
- mrdobolina0
plus, I am fine with you calling this "philosophy" which is what religion is. But science it isnt.
- ********0
There are a billion billion other worlds that are not as finely tuned, and guess what - we're not there saying how finley tuned they are...
Nonetheless, Disc. - Did God create the universe prefect enough for it to develop us without his intervention or not ?
- discipler0
comparing it to those of the planets in our solar system, for one. and it doesn't require comparison. it's about knowing the spectrum of what supports life and what does not. There is an impossibly small window of tolerance in which organic life can survive. Earth has been tweaked with fine tuned precision to support life. It's not something that random mindless processes could have accomplished.
- ********0
actually mrdobolina, not to be a smart-@ss, but there are vastly different physical laws that exist on other planets. I think he's referring to the specific atmospheric pressure, gravity and average temperatures that exist on Earth. They're condusive for life.
- discipler0
plus, I am fine with you calling this "philosophy" which is what religion is. But science it isnt.
mrdobolina
(Aug 15 05, 11:21)
-------------------------------What "this" are you speaking of, mrdobs? Do you know what qualifies as science?
- ********0
Gravity (small g) on Earth, much different than elsewhere.
ATM pressure much different to vastly different than elsewhere.
temperatures, vastly different than elsewhere.
Universal Gravity (big g) holds things together though between planetoids.
- discipler0
mikotondria,
we have the capability to observe distant galaxies and know enough about orbital patterns, the size of suns and distances to know how uniquely positioned we are. For more info:
As for your second question, there are different opinions on that. I personally believe that God had a direct hand in creating humanity, as opposed to programing things to unfold a certain way.
- ********0
one way or another, we definitely live on a unique planet. the chances of finding the exact same conditions, in other areas of our universe, are slim to none.
- mrdobolina0
ID. It is all about religion, so it is all philosophy, and not science.
If you can't prove god, you can't prove creation.
don't start naming scientists that aren't religious either or my head will explode.
You think the designer is god, so don't fake it.
- yarsrevenge0
you know what really bothers me about those who oppose discipler... is that instead of just posting an intelligent argument against what he thinks to be true, they come with agression and try to throw their little stabs here and there as their exclaimation point... but it only works against them. It is this kind of thinking that begins wars after the snowball rolls to the bottom of the hill. Nobody wants to debate on a civilized manner.
+2 for discipler for whether right or wrong, keeps his composure...
- version30
it's obvious you do not believe in evolution as you are the same dimwitted copy and paste fool from whence I first read a post of yours
there is something in people that make them who we are and that is not god
explain the audio here:
http://www.superfamous.com/empir…evolution sure is compelling
----------------
ignorant? I think notdiscipler
LA
US
Send email
View website
Citizen since: Aug 30 04
PBS Broadcasts: 6
PVN Topics: 1
PVN Responses: 1214Last logged in: Aug 15 05
Last broadcast: Aug 09 05Version3
- discipler0
mrdobs, it's probably best that you just agree to disagree with me. I don't know if you are just trying to push buttons or if you really are still that in-the-dark on this issue. For 732nd time, here is your definition of I.D.. I won't discuss this point any further with you: http://www.ideacenter.org/conten…
- mrdobolina0
ID is creationism dressed up in a tuxedo.
- ********0
I think we touched upon the Drake equation here, but to link:
http://www.activemind.com/Myster…Discipler, you say you personally believe that God did not set up the universe to run 'automatically' as it were, on a set of initial principles..
Why do think then, that God chose to enact this rather more inefficient creation ?
From experience, I know it is easier to write a script to perform my action than to do it manually in each instance.
Was this a design error ?
It just doesnt fit with the idea of an Omni..
- ********0
+100 for discipler !! :)