|
ozpowermo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
(...continued) no new 'kinds' of species are coming out, God just stopped working :).
"It is self evident"
I agree with that, the truth is self evident: when the radiometric dating shows something to be millions or billions of years old, then it is self evident... the evidence doesn't show that it was created 6000 years ago.
There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that an actual designer was involved in anything that we've seen... ID has NEVER been able to provide such evidence!
ozpowermo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
"The presence of irreducible complexity."
Irreducible complexity is proven wrong EVERY TIME, every time creationists point and say this is too complex to break down, biologists show them how it's broken down, functional AND observed in existing animals!
The car analogy is wrong on so many levels:
a. car's don't reproduce, they don't occur naturally.
b. we KNOW that cars are designed because we have records of the designers, we also have new models coming out every year (continue...)
bigwhammyRocks (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
"to conclude that an animate object was designed?"
The presence of irreducible complexity.
Does the fact you can observe a car, do experiments on it, examine it's parts and figure out how it works mean that Henry Ford (the designer) does not exist?
"{information content} you still fail to show EVIDENCE supporting that idea!"
It is self evident by simple deduction. A language convention is a prearranged by logical necessity. If it were not the receiver would not be able to read it.
ozpowermo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Anything? No response? Is that a common thing creationists do?
ozpowermo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
(continued)
What experiment leads you to conclude that an animate object was designed? What evidence would you use to support that experiment?
ozpowermo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
Science-
"Systematized knowledge derived from observation, study, and experimentation carried on in order to determine the nature or principles of what is being studied."
Cosmology, abiogenesis, forensic science, they're all based on things that can be studied based on observation and experiments...
And while you claim that "language convention and information content present in all cells can only be explained in terms of intelligence", you still fail to show EVIDENCE supporting that idea!
bigwhammyRocks (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
"science does NOT address things that can't be observed"
Wow you are a science denier.
If that were true, we would not have cosmological theories, abiogenesis conjectures, forensic science (deals with past unobserved events) or macro-evolution conjectures because they can not be observed. Yet they are still called science.
"What evidence? "
The language convention and information content present in all cells can only be explained in terms of intelligence.
ozpowermo (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
"thus you only accept materilaist conclusions"
That's called SCIENCE, science does NOT address things that can't be observed... and the spiritual world CAN'T be observed.
"even when the evidence points to intelligent intervention - as in the case for biogenesis."
What evidence? Tell me what evidence points to an "intelligent intervention", how does that manifest in abiogenesis?
MON4G (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
pleas reply
MON4G (November 30, 1999 at 12:00 am)
creationlism aka god stuff was made when people didnt understand somthing like in greece i think they was wind god and night god day god they didnt understand theyv been proven now wrong and people are to scared to tell every christian jew muslim your wrong about what they belive so the majority of people who are god belivers push science to the side and its right what he said about its easer about saying its just god but science isnt easy and thats what makes it intresting thankyou for reading. |
