Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Intelligent Design=Ignorant Anthropomorphism

Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 5:01:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

Yeah, just keep telling yourself there is no God, and that Christ is not on his throne.

Keep hiding from God, but one of these days, your false refuge will be destroyed.

As the Lord said to those unbelieving Israelites of old, he says all those who despise his Son:

"16 Therefore thus says the Lord God:

"Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation,
A tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation;
Whoever believes will not act hastily.

17 Also I will make justice the measuring line,
And righteousness the plummet;
The hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
And the waters will overflow the hiding place.

18 Your covenant with death will be annulled,
And your agreement with Sheol will not stand;
When the overflowing scourge passes through,
Then you will be trampled down by it.

19 As often as it goes out it will take you;
For morning by morning it will pass over,
And by day and by night;
It will be a terror just to understand the report."

20 For the bed is too short to stretch out on,
And the covering so narrow that one cannot wrap himself in it.

21 For the Lord will rise up as at Mount Perazim,
He will be angry as in the Valley of Gibeon"
That He may do His work, His awesome work,
And bring to pass His act, His unusual act.

22 Now therefore, do not be mockers,
Lest your bonds be made strong;
For I have heard from the Lord God of hosts,
A destruction determined even upon the whole earth.
(Isaiah 28:16-22)
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 6:11:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 5:01:52 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

Yeah, just keep telling yourself there is no God, and that Christ is not on his throne.

Keep hiding from God, but one of these days, your false refuge will be destroyed.

As the Lord said to those unbelieving Israelites of old, he says all those who despise his Son:

"16 Therefore thus says the Lord God:

"Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation,
A tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation;
Whoever believes will not act hastily.

17 Also I will make justice the measuring line,
And righteousness the plummet;
The hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
And the waters will overflow the hiding place.

18 Your covenant with death will be annulled,
And your agreement with Sheol will not stand;
When the overflowing scourge passes through,
Then you will be trampled down by it.

19 As often as it goes out it will take you;
For morning by morning it will pass over,
And by day and by night;
It will be a terror just to understand the report."

20 For the bed is too short to stretch out on,
And the covering so narrow that one cannot wrap himself in it.

21 For the Lord will rise up as at Mount Perazim,
He will be angry as in the Valley of Gibeon"
That He may do His work, His awesome work,
And bring to pass His act, His unusual act.

22 Now therefore, do not be mockers,
Lest your bonds be made strong;
For I have heard from the Lord God of hosts,
A destruction determined even upon the whole earth.
(Isaiah 28:16-22)

Mindless drivel. This shows that you have absolutely no basis for your beliefs, and that you turn into a robot when confronted with the reality. All you can so is spout mindless drivel, written by superstitious primitives. But helps to make my point as well.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 7:08:24 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

Intelligent Design doesn't answer the questions involving unnecessary complexities, however the Bible does address that issue as I'm sure you're aware of. Which goes back to my statement regarding not being able to make any claims to a potential creator ("would have to be impersonal, cannot be the God in the Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon, etc.").

Intelligent Design is only a part of the puzzle.
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 8:45:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

What you refer to as "a faulty pattern-matching system" is actually called "intuition."

You intuitively understand that the creation implies a Creator, you just choose to ignore that intuition and caul it "faulty."

You intentionally suppress the truth in order to justify your sin, and so, you are without excuse:

18 "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them.
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened."
(Romans 1:18-21)
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 9:06:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.

No offense, bornofgod, but I believe you have some form of mental illness.

"The information your mind is chaotic" is an apt description of you, as evidenced by statements like this:

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.

I do hope you're being treated for this condition.
If not, I hope you will seek treatment at some point.

I've seen your videos, and I'm sincerely concerned for your welfare.
I wish you the best, bornofgod.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 9:08:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 9:06:44 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.

No offense, bornofgod, but I believe you have some form of mental illness.

"The information your mind is chaotic" is an apt description of you, as evidenced by statements like this:

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.

I do hope you're being treated for this condition.
If not, I hope you will seek treatment at some point.

I've seen your videos, and I'm sincerely concerned for your welfare.
I wish you the best, bornofgod.

Unbelievers like yourself don't believe in our invisible Creator or hear His voice.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 11:43:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.
With all of the legislation being passed with a theistic basis, one cannot credibly claim that religion isn't being mandated.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.
How quickly theists forget. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter/energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Sorry, but that does amount to a scientific finding against a creator.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.
And if someone thinks they have their noon tea with Elvis, proof that Elvis is alive has been provided to that human... or they're freakin' nuts. I'm going with the second option... in both cases. You seem to think that no one is ever mentally unstable anymore. At least... not when their hallucinations involve God.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 11:44:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 9:08:37 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 9:06:44 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.

No offense, bornofgod, but I believe you have some form of mental illness.

"The information your mind is chaotic" is an apt description of you, as evidenced by statements like this:

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.

I do hope you're being treated for this condition.
If not, I hope you will seek treatment at some point.

I've seen your videos, and I'm sincerely concerned for your welfare.
I wish you the best, bornofgod.

Unbelievers like yourself don't believe in our invisible Creator or hear His voice.

I'm happy to see that you were able to extract that message. You are correct. I'm sane, you're not.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 11:48:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.
And if you can hear the voice of God, then you're very likely schizophrenic.

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.
When a computer programmer punches in memory addresses, parameter values and the numbers or mnemonics for those operations, the digital data is fed to a processor. When God feeds his analog signal in, where does it go to be processed, and what mechanisms process the signal. Once processed what happens to the signal.

And why are you not taking your medication?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/4/2014 11:52:51 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 7:08:24 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

Intelligent Design doesn't answer the questions involving unnecessary complexities, however the Bible does address that issue as I'm sure you're aware of. Which goes back to my statement regarding not being able to make any claims to a potential creator ("would have to be impersonal, cannot be the God in the Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon, etc.").
If you ask enough people, you'll find people who tell you the Bible talks about nuclear weapons, that it holds the keys to mysteries yet to be found, etc., etc. People read into the Bible whatever they wish it to say - even when what they claim it says isn't even close to the actual words.

Intelligent Design is only a part of the puzzle.

You're not paying attention. Intelligent Design isn't any part of the puzzle. The puzzle has been assembled and there are no pieces missing.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 12:05:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 8:45:06 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

What you refer to as "a faulty pattern-matching system" is actually called "intuition."
No, intuition is a larger scope involving things we believe we know and decide, which are often suggested to us, and/or decided for us. It's researched through the science of "behavioral economics", and any good read on behavior economics will demonstrate how flawed intuition is, as well as how often we believe we're making decisions, which are really being made for us.

You intuitively understand that the creation implies a Creator, you just choose to ignore that intuition and caul it "faulty."
I'm afraid you're trying to teach when you should really be studying. I would recommend "Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely, as well as "The Up Side of Irrationality" and "The Honest Truth about Dishonesty" by the same author and/or "Brain Bugs" by Dean Buonomano. I've read them all and they lend very good insight into our mental meanderings, what we actually control in regard to decisions we think we've made, and some of the things our brain does without our knowledge, which alters our perspective.

For instance, most people have no idea that like a parent that carefully filters the information her child is exposed to, the brain edits and censors much of the the information it feeds to the conscious mind. In the same fashion that your brain likely edited out the extra "the" from the previous sentence, we are generally blissfully unaware of the arbitrary and irrational factors that govern our decisions and behaviors. -- [Buonomano, Dean (2011-07-04). Brain Bugs: How the Brain's Flaws Shape Our Lives (p. 16). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.]


You intentionally suppress the truth in order to justify your sin, and so, you are without excuse:
What sin do you suggest I have committed that I'm suppressing? I probably live a much cleaner life than you. But I don't worry myself about comments made toward imaginary sky fairies, and you probably rate that above pedophilia and murder, because I care about what does or doesn't hurt people, and you try to live by a primitive and barbaric list. Who did you have for dinner tonight?

I deleted the ancient drivel. It's meaningless rhetoric.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 12:13:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 11:43:04 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.
With all of the legislation being passed with a theistic basis, one cannot credibly claim that religion isn't being mandated.

Like what?

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.
How quickly theists forget. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter/energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Sorry, but that does amount to a scientific finding against a creator.

Science doesn't claim evidence against a creator, remember?

Do you claim that a creator is absolutely impossible?

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.
And if someone thinks they have their noon tea with Elvis, proof that Elvis is alive has been provided to that human... or they're freakin' nuts. I'm going with the second option... in both cases. You seem to think that no one is ever mentally unstable anymore. At least... not when their hallucinations involve God.

No I do not think that no one is ever mentally unstable. The fact that some people hallucinate is not evidence against a creator's ability to communicate with a human. Or do you think a creator would be unable to communicate to a human being on a personal level?
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 12:15:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 11:52:51 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 7:08:24 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

Intelligent Design doesn't answer the questions involving unnecessary complexities, however the Bible does address that issue as I'm sure you're aware of. Which goes back to my statement regarding not being able to make any claims to a potential creator ("would have to be impersonal, cannot be the God in the Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon, etc.").
If you ask enough people, you'll find people who tell you the Bible talks about nuclear weapons, that it holds the keys to mysteries yet to be found, etc., etc. People read into the Bible whatever they wish it to say - even when what they claim it says isn't even close to the actual words.

Intelligent Design is only a part of the puzzle.

You're not paying attention. Intelligent Design isn't any part of the puzzle. The puzzle has been assembled and there are no pieces missing.
I agree, but I think you're looking at the wrong box top.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 12:26:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 12:15:58 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 11:52:51 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 7:08:24 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

Intelligent Design doesn't answer the questions involving unnecessary complexities, however the Bible does address that issue as I'm sure you're aware of. Which goes back to my statement regarding not being able to make any claims to a potential creator ("would have to be impersonal, cannot be the God in the Bible, Quran, Book of Mormon, etc.").
If you ask enough people, you'll find people who tell you the Bible talks about nuclear weapons, that it holds the keys to mysteries yet to be found, etc., etc. People read into the Bible whatever they wish it to say - even when what they claim it says isn't even close to the actual words.

Intelligent Design is only a part of the puzzle.

You're not paying attention. Intelligent Design isn't any part of the puzzle. The puzzle has been assembled and there are no pieces missing.
I agree, but I think you're looking at the wrong box top.

It's the only one we have presenting anything for us to observe.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 12:42:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 12:13:35 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 11:43:04 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.
With all of the legislation being passed with a theistic basis, one cannot credibly claim that religion isn't being mandated.

Like what?
Censorship of radio and television despite the 1st Amendment.
Prohibition of same-sex marriage
Obstructions against stem-cell research
The recent Supreme court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case...
etc...

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.
How quickly theists forget. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter/energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Sorry, but that does amount to a scientific finding against a creator.

Science doesn't claim evidence against a creator, remember?
This is what just blows me away about theists! Do you think the laws of thermodynamics are part of a muffin recipe? Did you think it was part of the Girl Scout oath? Were you under the impression that they're a poem?

NO! They're a fundamental part of science. And since the First Law of Thermodynamics clearly states that matter/energy CANNOT be created, it would seem that science does claim evidence against a creator. How can you be so blind as to not see that?

Do you claim that a creator is absolutely impossible?
I claim there isn't one. Science claims that creation is impossible.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.
And if someone thinks they have their noon tea with Elvis, proof that Elvis is alive has been provided to that human... or they're freakin' nuts. I'm going with the second option... in both cases. You seem to think that no one is ever mentally unstable anymore. At least... not when their hallucinations involve God.

No I do not think that no one is ever mentally unstable. The fact that some people hallucinate is not evidence against a creator's ability to communicate with a human. Or do you think a creator would be unable to communicate to a human being on a personal level?

Why does this supposed creator never communicate anything of value which might be used to verify that he exists? Perhaps the creator could tell one of his faithful nut-jobs the energy level necessary to isolate the element in dark matter. But we never receive anything like that. We tend to get nothing but Bible-like gibberish. Never anything of substance.

Our very own Bornofgod is what we get. For more than 30-years I worked at the local agency, the phone number for which every nut-job in the country knows by heart. I've spoken to a lot of them, talked them out of suicide, and connected them with the right kind of professional help. Never have I found one who thinks they actually speak with God who was other than an absolute lunatic.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
sovereigngracereigns
Posts: 585
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 12:52:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 12:05:39 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 8:45:06 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.
One of the problems with these types of arguments is that they often give the impression that they are in defense of something mandated (e.g.," we Christians/theists demand that you atheists believe in God/that God exists".). If anything, in a sense it appears to be the other way around.

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.

Except of course, that many of the "designs" proclaimed as intelligent are actually not intelligent at all. They work for the purpose of natural selection but just barely, and often with unnecessary complexities, hap-hazard systems, and faulty structures. How many humans have to choke to death each year before one looks at the breathing hole of a whale or dolphin and understands that routing food, water and air through the same plumbing is not "intelligent"?

And since there is no evidence of an external intelligence, to believe in one demonstrates a similar lack of intelligence and also demonstrates the faulty pattern-matching system which evolved in the human brain, and is common to other species as well. It is this faulty pattern-matching which leads to various superstitions. One has to understand that it does exist, how it fails in operations, and then one can usually avert the adoption of false positives as true patterns.

What you refer to as "a faulty pattern-matching system" is actually called "intuition."
No, intuition is a larger scope involving things we believe we know and decide, which are often suggested to us, and/or decided for us. It's researched through the science of "behavioral economics", and any good read on behavior economics will demonstrate how flawed intuition is, as well as how often we believe we're making decisions, which are really being made for us.

You intuitively understand that the creation implies a Creator, you just choose to ignore that intuition and caul it "faulty."
I'm afraid you're trying to teach when you should really be studying. I would recommend "Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely, as well as "The Up Side of Irrationality" and "The Honest Truth about Dishonesty" by the same author and/or "Brain Bugs" by Dean Buonomano. I've read them all and they lend very good insight into our mental meanderings, what we actually control in regard to decisions we think we've made, and some of the things our brain does without our knowledge, which alters our perspective.

For instance, most people have no idea that like a parent that carefully filters the information her child is exposed to, the brain edits and censors much of the the information it feeds to the conscious mind. In the same fashion that your brain likely edited out the extra "the" from the previous sentence, we are generally blissfully unaware of the arbitrary and irrational factors that govern our decisions and behaviors. -- [Buonomano, Dean (2011-07-04). Brain Bugs: How the Brain's Flaws Shape Our Lives (p. 16). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.]

Oh yeah, 'cause the opinions of a bunch of blowhards is more reliable than the Word of God.

No thanks.



You intentionally suppress the truth in order to justify your sin, and so, you are without excuse:
What sin do you suggest I have committed that I'm suppressing? I probably live a much cleaner life than you. But I don't worry myself about comments made toward imaginary sky fairies, and you probably rate that above pedophilia and murder, because I care about what does or doesn't hurt people, and you try to live by a primitive and barbaric list. Who did you have for dinner tonight?

That's irrelevant.

I was talking about your motive for suppressing the truth, not about which one of us does more good deeds.


I deleted the ancient drivel. It's meaningless rhetoric.

Yeah, you couldn't wait to get rid of it, because it's so convicting.

Listen,

You may think you're really smart, but I can assure you:

The fool has said in his heart,
"There is no God."

They are corrupt,
They have done abominable works,
There is none who does good.
2
The Lord looks down from heaven upon the children of men,
To see if there are any who understand, who seek God.
3
They have all turned aside,
They have together become corrupt;
There is none who does good,
No, not one.
4
Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge,
Who eat up my people as they eat bread,
And do not call on the Lord?
5
There they are in great fear,
For God is with the generation of the righteous.
6
You shame the counsel of the poor,
But the Lord is his refuge.
7
Oh, that the salvation of Israel would come out of Zion!
When the Lord brings back the captivity of His people,
Let Jacob rejoice and Israel be glad.
</strong
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 1:06:04 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 12:52:21 AM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/5/2014 12:05:39 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 8:45:06 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:56:09 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 6:45:53 PM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:

You intuitively understand that the creation implies a Creator, you just choose to ignore that intuition and caul it "faulty."
I'm afraid you're trying to teach when you should really be studying. I would recommend "Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely, as well as "The Up Side of Irrationality" and "The Honest Truth about Dishonesty" by the same author and/or "Brain Bugs" by Dean Buonomano. I've read them all and they lend very good insight into our mental meanderings, what we actually control in regard to decisions we think we've made, and some of the things our brain does without our knowledge, which alters our perspective.

For instance, most people have no idea that like a parent that carefully filters the information her child is exposed to, the brain edits and censors much of the the information it feeds to the conscious mind. In the same fashion that your brain likely edited out the extra "the" from the previous sentence, we are generally blissfully unaware of the arbitrary and irrational factors that govern our decisions and behaviors. -- [Buonomano, Dean (2011-07-04). Brain Bugs: How the Brain's Flaws Shape Our Lives (p. 16). W. W. Norton & Company. Kindle Edition.]


Oh yeah, 'cause the opinions of a bunch of blowhards is more reliable than the Word of God.
I don't think you're in any position to be referring to an MIT professor of Behavioral Economics as a "blow hard". That's especially true when you can't figure out the difference between a cherry-picked collection of ancient writings, selected by men in the 4th century who had no clue what was true or wasn't true - the "word of God". God didn't write a single word of it, didn't authorize any of it and had nothing at all to do with it. Learn the origins of that stupid book before you run around regurgitating absurd claims about it.

No thanks.
Because unlike the superstitious primitives who wrote that slavery, rape and child-killing is moral, someone who has actually studied intuition in-depth might actually have a clue what he's talking about, and you're not the least bit interested in the demonstrable truth as long as you have your bronze-age fairytales to cling to.



You intentionally suppress the truth in order to justify your sin, and so, you are without excuse:
What sin do you suggest I have committed that I'm suppressing? I probably live a much cleaner life than you. But I don't worry myself about comments made toward imaginary sky fairies, and you probably rate that above pedophilia and murder, because I care about what does or doesn't hurt people, and you try to live by a primitive and barbaric list. Who did you have for dinner tonight?

That's irrelevant.
It's not at all irrelevant. I take great care to see that my existence is no more detrimental to the existence of others, while you have they deprived of their very life for the sake of your taste buds. I'm simply showing you that you have no grounds upon which to suggest I live a "sinful" life.

I was talking about your motive for suppressing the truth, not about which one of us does more good deeds.


I deleted the ancient drivel. It's meaningless rhetoric.

Yeah, you couldn't wait to get rid of it, because it's so convicting.
If it were convincing, I'd be convinced. I tend to know the Bible much better than do most Christians.

Listen,

You may think you're really smart, but I can assure you:
No! No you can't assure me of that. You can only assure me that YOU believe it. And you're not in a position to be telling me what is and isn't true. I bet you believe Jesus saved a woman taken in adultery too. Because you have no concern for truth. You only care about what you wish were true, and refuse to look beyond that for fear that it isn't true. And that fear is well warranted. Because all the drivel you suckle from that book is pure idiocy. The only thing worse is believing it's "the word of God" because the men of the 4th century who selected it claimed it was. How pathetic.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 2:03:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 12:42:43 AM, Beastt wrote:

With all of the legislation being passed with a theistic basis, one cannot credibly claim that religion isn't being mandated.

Like what?
Censorship of radio and television despite the 1st Amendment.
Prohibition of same-sex marriage
Obstructions against stem-cell research
The recent Supreme court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case...
etc...

If I were to tell you that laws prohibiting theft and murder were Christian based, you would tell me I'm wrong, correct? And you would be correct in doing so because these are common universal laws. How is it then that you can claim these issues you're referring to are theist-based? Do you think it's only the religious that support censorship?

Atheists are not concerned about the content of TV programming during the children morning TV time slots?

Why are some atheists against same-sex marriage? Why are some homosexuals against same-sex marriage?

Why do atheists vary in their opinions on stem-cell research?

And out of curiosity, what exactly is your issue concerning the Hobby Lobby Case?

Another problem is since atheists cannot claim that a creator does not exist (e.g. "science makes no claim either way."), then there can't be any particular claim anyone can make in regards to a creator that atheists can't claim to be non-existent.
How quickly theists forget. The First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter/energy can be neither created nor destroyed. Sorry, but that does amount to a scientific finding against a creator.

Science doesn't claim evidence against a creator, remember?
This is what just blows me away about theists! Do you think the laws of thermodynamics are part of a muffin recipe? Did you think it was part of the Girl Scout oath? Were you under the impression that they're a poem?

NO! They're a fundamental part of science. And since the First Law of Thermodynamics clearly states that matter/energy CANNOT be created, it would seem that science does claim evidence against a creator. How can you be so blind as to not see that?

For one, it's impossible for a universe to be created. I don't mean in the same way that a tornado is created naturally by strong winds hitting from the opposite directions, but it's impossible for an intelligent being to purposefully create a universe, unless it's created outside of natural law. So unless it's impossible for an intelligent being to work outside of natural law, your claim is meaningless.

In addition, I'm just wondering if you think the claim that science does not prove or disprove a creator is just some nifty catch phrase that has no meaning? A muffin recipe? A girl scout oath? A poem?

Do you claim that a creator is absolutely impossible?
I claim there isn't one. Science claims that creation is impossible.

We have a problem here then. Since the percentages of atheist and agnostic scientists are so high by comparison to Bible believing scientists, how do you account for the agnostic scientists who's percentage is fairly high? Keeping in mind I'm talking about members of the National Academy Of Sciences, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

If a good portion of fully distinguished qualified scientists are not claiming God to be an impossibility (agnostics), where does that place your view?

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.
And if someone thinks they have their noon tea with Elvis, proof that Elvis is alive has been provided to that human... or they're freakin' nuts. I'm going with the second option... in both cases. You seem to think that no one is ever mentally unstable anymore. At least... not when their hallucinations involve God.

No I do not think that no one is ever mentally unstable. The fact that some people hallucinate is not evidence against a creator's ability to communicate with a human. Or do you think a creator would be unable to communicate to a human being on a personal level?

Why does this supposed creator never communicate anything of value which might be used to verify that he exists? Perhaps the creator could tell one of his faithful nut-jobs the energy level necessary to isolate the element in dark matter. But we never receive anything like that. We tend to get nothing but Bible-like gibberish. Never anything of substance.

A good number of scientists throughout the ages were believers who obviously did communicate things of value (Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Carver, etc.).

Our very own Bornofgod is what we get. For more than 30-years I worked at the local agency, the phone number for which every nut-job in the country knows by heart. I've spoken to a lot of them, talked them out of suicide, and connected them with the right kind of professional help. Never have I found one who thinks they actually speak with God who was other than an absolute lunatic.
I think you're mixing up hearing voices with God communicating to someone's spirit. I've never met a Christian who hears voices.
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 8:28:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 11:44:00 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 9:08:37 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 9:06:44 PM, sovereigngracereigns wrote:
At 8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.

No offense, bornofgod, but I believe you have some form of mental illness.

"The information your mind is chaotic" is an apt description of you, as evidenced by statements like this:

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.

I do hope you're being treated for this condition.
If not, I hope you will seek treatment at some point.

I've seen your videos, and I'm sincerely concerned for your welfare.
I wish you the best, bornofgod.

Unbelievers like yourself don't believe in our invisible Creator or hear His voice.

I'm happy to see that you were able to extract that message. You are correct. I'm sane, you're not.

Are you sure that the masses of people in this world aren't the one's who have no clue who they are in this world of illusions?
bornofgod
Posts: 11,322
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 8:32:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/4/2014 11:48:57 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/4/2014 8:50:13 PM, bornofgod wrote:
At 8/4/2014 4:43:37 PM, Beastt wrote:
Many theists appear to be proposing that God is evidenced by the intelligence found within the designs in nature and the observable cosmos. They insist that this be considered "evidence for God". The truth is that the existence of order and patterns is explained by chaos theory and is NOT indicative of intelligent intervention. We can demonstrate how chaos theory produces patterns from non-order. There is no demonstrable link between God and these ordered patterns. So it is evidence for Chaos Theory, and is not evidence for God.

People see patterns, think about how they might produce such patterns, and assume that an intelligence was therefore involved in the production of the pattern. One user in particular tends to emulate a near form of worship when it comes to checkerboard patterns, yet rejects all non-intelligent production of patterns as indicators of a hidden intelligence. That's a bit like saying that all grass must be intentionally planted and tended, and that grass found in remote areas without an apparent gardener, is evidence for a hidden gardener. Obviously, that is circular and incorrect. In reality, it's evidence that grass can grow without a gardener, just as patterns can emerge from non-choice.

A blade of grass vibrating in a wind is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A planet orbiting a star is a pattern emerging from non-choice. A crystal is a pattern emerging from non-choice. The patterns found in drying mud at the bottom of a dry lake or pond, is a pattern emerging from non-choice.

In all such examples, we can isolate the forces and properties involved, and demonstrate how they work together to produce the patterns we observe.

Participants here will likely do better if they enter having a basic concept of Chaos Theory. But perhaps those who don't can learn something about it, and how natural mechanisms can be demonstrated to produce patterns and order from apparent chaos, without implying any intelligent intervention.

Claims for Intelligent Design (also being called "Natural Theism"), are simply people who misunderstand what they see, and jump to illogical conclusions, based on that misunderstanding, and then attach those conclusions to previously held theistic ideas.

The information in your mind is chaotic and that's why you can't hear the voice of God spoken in the written testimonies I've been sharing in this forum.
And if you can hear the voice of God, then you're very likely schizophrenic.

Every invisible vibration is processed into illusions by the order of our Creator's plan and design called Eternal Life. It's no different than what a computer programmer does with 0's and 1's in a binary code. If binary code was randomly processed through a computer, the results on a computer monitor or robotic movements would not make any sense to us. Every illusion that is build in this world has to be planned before it can be understood by the observer.
When a computer programmer punches in memory addresses, parameter values and the numbers or mnemonics for those operations, the digital data is fed to a processor. When God feeds his analog signal in, where does it go to be processed, and what mechanisms process the signal. Once processed what happens to the signal.

And why are you not taking your medication?

A computer and a computer programmer are only part of God's dream. Nothing we observe is real but the invisible vibrations ( information ) is our true reality. This information is God's thoughts.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/5/2014 5:57:08 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 2:03:43 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/5/2014 12:42:43 AM, Beastt wrote:

With all of the legislation being passed with a theistic basis, one cannot credibly claim that religion isn't being mandated.

Like what?
Censorship of radio and television despite the 1st Amendment.
Prohibition of same-sex marriage
Obstructions against stem-cell research
The recent Supreme court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case...
etc...

If I were to tell you that laws prohibiting theft and murder were Christian based, you would tell me I'm wrong, correct? And you would be correct in doing so because these are common universal laws. How is it then that you can claim these issues you're referring to are theist-based? Do you think it's only the religious that support censorship?

Atheists are not concerned about the content of TV programming during the children morning TV time slots?
Unfortunately, people accept defaults. We are generations from when it was decided - not by the Supreme Court, whose job this would be - but by the Federal Communications Commission (an appointed - NOT elected, group of officials), that radio and television are the only two segments of American life, not subject to the protections of the First Amendment of the Constitution. If that doesn't bother people living in the U.S., the only conclusion is that they're simply unAmerican.
A child's programming is their parent's job. It's not the government's job to worry about whether or not I hear profanity, or see a nipple. !! Oh My !! And the FCC made their decision after receiving letters - one in particular from a "Reverend" who was offended by something he heard on the radio. The proper response would have been, "Reverend, change the station!"

Why are some atheists against same-sex marriage? Why are some homosexuals against same-sex marriage?
That's a great question to ask atheists. Why not start a thread. In fact, if you don't, I think I will. I think you'll find only a very few have any reservations.

Why do atheists vary in their opinions on stem-cell research?
Because atheism only addresses the existence of any gods. It's not a full-fledged political position. So again, if you think the number is substantial, ask them. It's easily the most promising medical research to come along in a century, and it has been stifled and retarded, by misplaced religious concerns - as usual, by people who have no clue what they're talking about.

And out of curiosity, what exactly is your issue concerning the Hobby Lobby Case?
I don't think one's medical coverage should depend upon the religious beliefs of their boss (or their boss's boss), and their gender. Do you not understand that the Constitution strictly prohibits alternative treatment on the basis of gender and religious beliefs? If you worked for me, should I be able to keep you from buying animal-based foods with your pay check?
(Continued)
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2014 2:32:51 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 2:03:43 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/5/2014 12:42:43 AM, Beastt wrote:


Science doesn't claim evidence against a creator, remember?
This is what just blows me away about theists! Do you think the laws of thermodynamics are part of a muffin recipe? Did you think it was part of the Girl Scout oath? Were you under the impression that they're a poem?

NO! They're a fundamental part of science. And since the First Law of Thermodynamics clearly states that matter/energy CANNOT be created, it would seem that science does claim evidence against a creator. How can you be so blind as to not see that?

For one, it's impossible for a universe to be created.
Because it's impossible for matter/energy to be created.

I don't mean in the same way that a tornado is created naturally by strong winds hitting from the opposite directions, but it's impossible for an intelligent being to purposefully create a universe, unless it's created outside of natural law.
There's no such thing as "outside of natural law". Had the outcome of big bang coalesced into a different universe, it would have different laws. But those laws would still be "natural" to that universe. You're trying to suggest that the fact that the universe couldn't have been created points to a supernatural "creator". But that's still creation and there isn't a shred of evidence for that. However, matter/energy DO exist, and matter/energy CAN'T be created. Therefore, matter/energy have always existed, though not necessarily in the same states.

So unless it's impossible for an intelligent being to work outside of natural law, your claim is meaningless.
Not at all. My claim is fully supported by every shred of pertinent evidence, while your claim is soundly refuted by science. And since your claim was that science says nothing against a creator of the universe, your point fails.

In addition, I'm just wondering if you think the claim that science does not prove or disprove a creator is just some nifty catch phrase that has no meaning? A muffin recipe? A girl scout oath? A poem?
No one said anything about "proving" anything. Children run around carelessly flapping about with the word "prove". Reality consists of evidences, not proofs. Science has no evidence consistent with a creator, and evidence against the suggestion of creation.

Do you claim that a creator is absolutely impossible?
I claim there isn't one. Science claims that creation is impossible.

We have a problem here then. Since the percentages of atheist and agnostic scientists are so high by comparison to Bible believing scientists, how do you account for the agnostic scientists who's percentage is fairly high?
For starters, I look to the actual statistics rather than your made-up assertions. Among the membership of the National Academy of Science, the breakdown is as follows...
- 7% hold theistic beliefs (theists)
- 72.2% hold no theistic beliefs (atheists)
- 20.8% have doubts (agnostic)
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Keeping in mind I'm talking about members of the National Academy Of Sciences, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
I'm not sure how you arrive at 20.8% being relatively high in comparison to 72.7%, but one must remember that we're talking about a proposition which looks to before the full development of the laws of physics which we now hold. Though it's purely conjecture, one could propose that under a different set of physical laws, different possibilities and impossibilities would take hold. However, one is no more justified in basing beliefs upon purely conjectural possibilities, than to harbor a belief that Rudolph and Santa are real characters in an alternate universe.

If a good portion of fully distinguished qualified scientists are not claiming God to be an impossibility (agnostics), where does that place your view?
Where is it written that holding out a doubt about a god, means you accept that the proposed god had to create the universe?

That being the case, an atheist can't claim that God doesn't communicate to certain humans on a personal level. In the case that God communicates with certain humans, proof has been provided to that human. And of course there would be no reason for that person to doubt intelligent design.
And if someone thinks they have their noon tea with Elvis, proof that Elvis is alive has been provided to that human... or they're freakin' nuts. I'm going with the second option... in both cases. You seem to think that no one is ever mentally unstable anymore. At least... not when their hallucinations involve God.

No I do not think that no one is ever mentally unstable. The fact that some people hallucinate is not evidence against a creator's ability to communicate with a human. Or do you think a creator would be unable to communicate to a human being on a personal level?

Why does this supposed creator never communicate anything of value which might be used to verify that he exists? Perhaps the creator could tell one of his faithful nut-jobs the energy level necessary to isolate the element in dark matter. But we never receive anything like that. We tend to get nothing but Bible-like gibberish. Never anything of substance.

A good number of scientists throughout the ages were believers who obviously did communicate things of value (Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Newton, Carver, etc.).
And the farther back you go, the more theistic scientists you find. Conversely, as you work forward through history and begin to include the major discoveries of science such as big-bang, chaos theory, abiogenesis and evolution, you find fewer and fewer scientists who hold theistic beliefs. Put another way, the more we learn, the less cause there is to believe in any kind of god.


Our very own Bornofgod is what we get. For more than 30-years I worked at the local agency, the phone number for which every nut-job in the country knows by heart. I've spoken to a lot of them, talked them out of suicide, and connected them with the right kind of professional help. Never have I found one who thinks they actually speak with God who was other than an absolute lunatic.
I think you're mixing up hearing voices with God communicating to someone's spirit. I've never met a Christian who hears voices.
And when you do, you likely decide they're not a "real Christian". But if one wants to know if Christians sometimes claim to hear the voice of God, then needn't look very far. As the site points out, it was claimed that many of the authors of biblical manuscripts heard God's voice. But I guess most of them weren't Christians, since most of the manuscripts were written long before the supposed time of Jesus.
http://pamsheppard.com...
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
melody1
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2014 2:27:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I am sorry to all of you atheists for the Christians on this forum that make the rest of us look bad. You are correct the laws of thermodynamics state matter cannot be created or destroyed. However, this also contradicts the atheistic origin of the universe, because there is no explanation in atheistic communities as to how the matter from the big bang got there in the first place. Since Intelligent design states the belief in a being who invented the laws of physics it stands to reason this being could bend these rules to its will. I would thank you for a debate that is not based on personal insults.
dee-em
Posts: 6,444
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/6/2014 7:35:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/6/2014 2:27:03 PM, melody1 wrote:
I am sorry to all of you atheists for the Christians on this forum that make the rest of us look bad.

Not just Christians unfortunately.

You are correct the laws of thermodynamics state matter cannot be created or destroyed. However, this also contradicts the atheistic origin of the universe, because there is no explanation in atheistic communities as to how the matter from the big bang got there in the first place.

I need to correct you. Replace 'atheistic' with 'scientific'. Atheism is simply non-belief in gods. We have no onus to explain the origin of the universe. Science has that onus.

Secondly, there was no matter at the instant of the Big Bang. The universe then was in a pure energy state, incredibly hot and dense plasma. Matter formed much later as a residue when the universe had cooled sufficiently.

Thirdly, cosmologists don't propose that the Big Bang arose from absolutely nothing. It could have been a change of state from an earlier, different form.

Since Intelligent design states the belief in a being who invented the laws of physics it stands to reason this being could bend these rules to its will.

And where did this being come from? Absolutely nothing?

I would thank you for a debate that is not based on personal insults.

No problem.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2014 9:21:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/5/2014 5:57:08 PM, Beastt wrote:
At 8/5/2014 2:03:43 AM, RoderickSpode wrote:
At 8/5/2014 12:42:43 AM, Beastt wrote:

With all of the legislation being passed with a theistic basis, one cannot credibly claim that religion isn't being mandated.

Like what?
Censorship of radio and television despite the 1st Amendment.
Prohibition of same-sex marriage
Obstructions against stem-cell research
The recent Supreme court ruling in the Hobby Lobby case...
etc...

If I were to tell you that laws prohibiting theft and murder were Christian based, you would tell me I'm wrong, correct? And you would be correct in doing so because these are common universal laws. How is it then that you can claim these issues you're referring to are theist-based? Do you think it's only the religious that support censorship?

Atheists are not concerned about the content of TV programming during the children morning TV time slots?
Unfortunately, people accept defaults. We are generations from when it was decided - not by the Supreme Court, whose job this would be - but by the Federal Communications Commission (an appointed - NOT elected, group of officials), that radio and television are the only two segments of American life, not subject to the protections of the First Amendment of the Constitution. If that doesn't bother people living in the U.S., the only conclusion is that they're simply unAmerican.
A child's programming is their parent's job. It's not the government's job to worry about whether or not I hear profanity, or see a nipple. !! Oh My !! And the FCC made their decision after receiving letters - one in particular from a "Reverend" who was offended by something he heard on the radio. The proper response would have been, "Reverend, change the station!"

When people complain about content in the media, it's probably going to include reverends, clergy, etc. Unless we get rid of ministers, that's just going to be a reality. But they are not the only one's that are going to complain.

There's also racial sensitive censorship....and not everyone is happy about it. For instance, the use of certain Native American mascots in mostly professional sports, and some of it in college. The removal of the black face and the stereotype black person afraid of his own shadow in American entertainment. Asian stereotypes are being addressed more due to an active Asian media watchgroup, although the yellow face is still allowed in entertainment. How about gay stereotyping in entertainment? Are you aware that there's a gay media watch group? They weren't too happy about a comment made in the movie Hancock and protested. I'm sure we can expect more demands of censorship of gay stereotyping. And let's face it....stereotyping is a comedic commodity. It sells particularly in comedies. How do you feel about these kinds of censorships?

Now there was a time when movie censorship was influenced by a Catholic laymen, but that's pretty much been done away with.

Why are some atheists against same-sex marriage? Why are some homosexuals against same-sex marriage?
That's a great question to ask atheists. Why not start a thread. In fact, if you don't, I think I will. I think you'll find only a very few have any reservations.

They are no doubt a minority, but the point is that the issue of anti gay-marriage is not limited to the religious. It obviously wasn't tolerated in communist countries, and limited to only a few instances among royalty in pagan societies.

Why do atheists vary in their opinions on stem-cell research?
Because atheism only addresses the existence of any gods. It's not a full-fledged political position. So again, if you think the number is substantial, ask them. It's easily the most promising medical research to come along in a century, and it has been stifled and retarded, by misplaced religious concerns - as usual, by people who have no clue what they're talking about.

There are going to be certain issues put on ballots, etc. that are often going to be favored one way more with the religious, and another with non-religious or atheists. But the point is basically the same. There are no doubt Christians who support stem cell research, and atheists that don't. The atheists that don't support it may be very few, but they don't refuse to support it for religious reasons.

And out of curiosity, what exactly is your issue concerning the Hobby Lobby Case?
I don't think one's medical coverage should depend upon the religious beliefs of their boss (or their boss's boss), and their gender. Do you not understand that the Constitution strictly prohibits alternative treatment on the basis of gender and religious beliefs? If you worked for me, should I be able to keep you from buying animal-based foods with your pay check?
(Continued)
No, but I doubt think we're in danger of anything that extreme. I think the laws in connection to this case are quite scrutinizing. Abortion is a far more controversial and significant issue than vegetarianism. Abortion does involve taking a life away from a human being. But that's another issue.
RoderickSpode
Posts: 2,370
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/7/2014 10:03:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 8/6/2014 2:32:51 AM, Beastt wrote:


For one, it's impossible for a universe to be created.

Because it's impossible for matter/energy to be created.



I agree. I think it's absolutely impossible for a human being or an extraterrestrial to create a universe. Not for for an omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent God able to create outside of natural law. Can you really claim for sure that matter and energy had no beginning?

There's no such thing as "outside of natural law". Had the outcome of big bang coalesced into a different universe, it would have different laws. But those laws would still be "natural" to that universe. You're trying to suggest that the fact that the universe couldn't have been created points to a supernatural "creator". But that's still creation and there isn't a shred of evidence for that. However, matter/energy DO exist, and matter/energy CAN'T be created. Therefore, matter/energy have always existed, though not necessarily in the same states.

Generally the creator seems to reveal His evidence to human's on an individual basis. As long as that happens this whole controversy is going to continue as it does and has been for centuries. Scientists may never find evidence of God in a collective scientific sense, but they will never be able to put an end to the concept of God because God is going to continue to reveal Himself to individuals....which includes scientists at times....

http://www.godandscience.org...

Not at all. My claim is fully supported by every shred of pertinent evidence, while your claim is soundly refuted by science. And since your claim was that science says nothing against a creator of the universe, your point fails.

No, it's just something that science is not able to answer. Science is also not able to answer where life ultimately came from. Until it can do that, ruling out a creator able to work outside of natural law is a futile endeavor.

In addition, I'm just wondering if you think the claim that science does not prove or disprove a creator is just some nifty catch phrase that has no meaning? A muffin recipe? A girl scout oath? A poem?
No one said anything about "proving" anything. Children run around carelessly flapping about with the word "prove". Reality consists of evidences, not proofs. Science has no evidence consistent with a creator, and evidence against the suggestion of creation.

Science is not the only means of discovery. And quite frankly, one of the tools that God seems to use alongside a spiritual revealing is testimony from others. If God ever reveals Himself to you, you might expect the predecessor bringing the message to come from a scientist, but it might turn out to be from a street person.