Intelligent Design Confirms a Creator...

[DrewPaul]

No. we did not simply make up the multiverse. It emerged from known, self-consistent theory.

Just keep saying that to yourself over and over...just like Dorthy and her red shoes. No one actually knows or has proven there are other universes. You talk as if you know all about them and there is a known phenomena that produces them.

 

[DrewPaul]

Yes, I deny the earth had a cause.

Is it flat too?

 

[Jacksprat]

Is it flat too?

You are a theist. I am not.

 

[DrewPaul]

For some reason, you keep forgetting the important element in this, which is EVIDENCE. No, we do not need to “counter” an item that dwells in the realm of nonsense, and that is where claims without evidence such as ID fall. You seem to think that anybody can make up anything and declare it so, and that automatically necessitates the presentation of evidence to counter it. That is a totally ridiculous concept. It is ALWAYS those who present the concept who must then present the evidence for it to make it worthy of discussion. That’s the way that science works. No evidence, it’s just nonsense at that point.

What's the no-nonsense naturalistic version of how the universe came into existence and how mindless forces without plan or intent caused the universe to have the properties to cause intelligent life to exist? You claim your counter belief about our existence and the universe is just common every day sense. You have the floor please take your time to explain. I'm really curious about how time came to exist and the common sense explanation for that.

 

[DrewPaul]

You are a theist. I am not.

No you just don't have anything important to say. You know your limitations which is a good thing.

 

[Jacksprat]

No you just don't have anything important to say. You know your limitations which is a good thing.

Jesus loves you.

 

[watsup]

What's the no-nonsense naturalistic version of how the universe came into existence and how mindless forces without plan or intent caused the universe to have the properties to cause intelligent life to exist?

This is a HUGE strawman because you use the word “cause” as if there was intent. No one has said that the “mindless forces caused” life. It just happened. Yes, the ingredients for life were present at the Big Bang but, again, nowhere was there an “intent” to cause life. The naturalistic version is based on billions of years, certainly enough time for very basic life to appear as a result of “naturalistic” forces, and the “natural selection” of evolution took it from there. And there was certainly no guarantee that Homo sapiens would eventually arise. If some sort of cataclysmic event had not killed off the dinosaurs, there may have eventually been some sort of reptile creature as the “intelligent” top of the evolution scale.

Now perhaps you can tell us what your version is of how a so-called “Creator” came into existemce Eh?

 

[Gordy327]

No it does not because evolution can as easily be part of the design of a Creator. There is not a single aspect of evolution that shows it could not be designed.

And this is where my arguments are differing from others. I am not claiming that evolution is a design feature. I am saying that the existence of evolution does nothing to invalidate a designer/creator, as you claimed it did. I am claiming possibility. You are claiming absolute. You are claiming it as fact, so prove the fact.

Design implies an intent and lack of randomness. For ID to be valid, a "designer" must be validated. There is no objective evidence for one. ID implies an organism is perfectly "designed" to suit its environment, which negates randomness. This flies in the face of evolution, as evolution does not go by design, but rather is a reaction to an environment change over time.

 

[Dragonfly]

What's the no-nonsense naturalistic version of how the universe came into existence and how mindless forces without plan or intent caused the universe to have the properties to cause intelligent life to exist? You claim your counter belief about our existence and the universe is just common every day sense. You have the floor please take your time to explain. I'm really curious about how time came to exist and the common sense explanation for that.

What's wrong with the most honest, and sincere answer?

"We don't know."

As opposed to the tired claim of "god did it".

 

[DrewPaul]

What's wrong with the most honest, and sincere answer?

"We don't know."

As opposed to the tired claim of "god did it".

Or as opposed to the claim 'mindless forces did it'.

Because science and knowledge are advanced by making theories of what happened. Do you want all the scientist to shrug their shoulders sigh we don't know and go on unemployment rather that advance theories and ideas?

 

[Galactic Spin]

You need to give me good reason or facts to think this is the exception to the overwhelming rule.

But then you would invent a magical being and claim it is the exception to the rule. You are the one burdened with explaining this. How do you guys ALWAYS miss this simple idea?

 

[Galactic Spin]

Just keep saying that to yourself over and over...just like Dorthy and her red shoes.

In other words, you don't understand. Like, at all.

I don't "tell myself this". It's a fact. Multiverse theory emerged frm quantum theory. And it is also its own self consistent theory, though still nascent. These are facts.

This is not to assert multiverse theory is true. This is pointed out to show the difference between the fantasy ideas you invent -- that explain nothing -- and self consistent theory.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Or as opposed to the claim 'mindless forces did it'.

Because science and knowledge are advanced by making theories of what happened. Do you want all the scientist to shrug their shoulders sigh we don't know and go on unemployment rather that advance theories and ideas?

This is not what you are doing. In fact, you have done nothing g but shit onThe scientific attempts at explanation (despite not understanding them), while trotting out tired old ontological crap from centuries ago to prop up the idea of a magical sky daddy creator.

 

[DrewPaul]

No one has said that the “mindless forces caused” life. It just happened.

Is that an explanation for anything else? Is there any other phenomena we just shrug our shoulders and say it just happened?

I don't claim to know how a Creator came into existence or how a creator caused the universe to occur. I do know the virtual universe scientists created was caused by intelligent design.

 

[maquiscat]

Obviously there is order to the universe. But that does not imply an agent constructing that order or design.

Such is your belief, as much as it is a belief that an agent did/does construct or design the universe. And there is no hard evidence either way.

Now whether that fact, one way or the other has any real impact is a whole other matter. Heck, even things that are well established don't necessarily have any real impact. Would there be any real change in our lives for the sun to move around the earth instead of the earth moving around the sun? Just because there is a possibility for there to be a creator, that doesn't mean anything that science has discovered or proven changes.

 

[DrewPaul]

But then you would invent a magical being and claim it is the exception to the rule. You are the one burdened with explaining this. How do you guys ALWAYS miss this simple idea?

My belief is the universe was intentionally designed and caused to exist for the purpose of intelligent humans to exist. In support of that belief is the undisputed fact the universe and intelligent life exist. If you dispute my claim then explain your counter claim. And that is how people go about attempting to explain phenomena. Guth invented cosmic inflation as an explanation for why the universe is uniform temperature. Humans invent plausible causes then attempt to prove them.

 

[DrewPaul]

This is not what you are doing. In fact, you have done nothing g but shit onThe scientific attempts at explanation (despite not understanding them), while trotting out tired old ontological crap from centuries ago to prop up the idea of a magical sky daddy creator.

I have magical sky daddy you have magical mother nature.

 

[Galactic Spin]

My belief is the universe was intentionally designed and caused to exist for the purpose of intelligent humans to exist. In support of that belief is the undisputed fact the universe and intelligent life exist.

You can stop there.

That is in no way at all support for that belief. That is an egregious fallacy, and you aren't getting away with it.

 

[Galactic Spin]

I have magical sky daddy you have magical mother nature.

Except I don't need magic and have theory. You need magic and have no argument or theory. You need magic because it is magical nonsense.

 

[DrewPaul]

In other words, you don't understand. Like, at all.

I don't "tell myself this". It's a fact. Multiverse theory emerged frm quantum theory. And it is also its own self consistent theory, though still nascent. These are facts. You discredit yourself to ignore them, not even try to understand them, and to try to pin them to my whims or beliefs.

This is not to assert multiverse theory is true. This is pointed out to show the difference between the fantasy ideas you invent -- that explain nothing -- and self consistent theory.

Whe you don't understand something g and reflexively shit on it, that shows laziness and dishonesty.

If you don't think multiverse is true then it explains nothing right? Secondly if you're concerned about Occams Razor multiverse theory multiplies entities to infinity and beyond. I'm not shitting on the theory multiverse, if true it would explain how we find ourselves in a universe that supports our existence. Just as a Creator explains how the universe supports our existence.

 

[DrewPaul]

Except I don't need magic and have theory. You need magic and have no argument or theory. You need magic because it is magical nonsense.

Intelligent design isn't magic. Mindless forces minus plan or intent causing a universe that supports intelligent life is magical. If a virtual universe came into existence by accident that would be a magical event. Scientists, engineers and programmers causing the virtual universe to exist isn't magical at all. Scientists used ID to create a virtual universe.

 

[Galactic Spin]

If you don't think multiverse is true then it explains nothing right?

Uh...what?

It might be true. And it explains plenty.

The God myth explains nothing, regardless.

Secondly if you're concerned about Occams Razor multiverse theory multiplies entities to infinity and beyond.

And yet still would be less complicated and mysterious than an infinite, magical sky daddy that is allowed to defy every single constraint you expect every other idea to follow.

So occam's razor still would favor a multiverse over a sky daddy.

 

[Mulefoot]

Except I don't need magic and have theory. You need magic and have no argument or theory. You need magic because it is magical nonsense.

I hope you're not conflating say, evolutionary theory which is empirically supported and universally accepted by the scientific community, and multiverse theory which is non-empirically supported and currently only risen to the level as being scratched out on a notepad?

 

[maquiscat]

Just fat finger typos

You can't dismiss ANY possibility. Of anything. But again, let's be honest. You do not prepare fr ay possibility. You don't prepare for the possibility a unicorn will kick you in the face every time you turn your head.

Unevidenced, magical hooha goes on the same shelf, and for the same reasons.

You are rather changing the goal post here as your started with giving things consideration as opposed to preparing for them. Those are two different things. I give consideration to the possibility of a plan falling out of the sky on top of or near me, but I don't do any real preparation simply because the probability is so low. At best when I have idle time, I might consider what my actions/reactions might be in that unlikely event. I do more to prepare for a major automotive accident because that had a much higher probability, although even that is pretty low on my preparation list. But both events do get considered.

And turning this to the topic at hand, what real difference would it make whether the universe had a creator? Not a bloody thing would change. And even if we could prove a creator, that doesn't automatically make any given set of abilities, desires and motivations attributed to said creator true, any more than some of the abilities attributed to Chuck Norris are true.

 

[maquiscat]

No. I am not. Like, not at all. When an idea explains nothing, yields no useful information or predictions and constrains nothing, that is a clue the idea is worthless nonsense.

That's an objective fact.

Since worthless is a subjective value, any claim of something being worthless can not be an objective fact. Same goes for nonsense. That too is a subjective value.