Total Posts:84|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The one creationist argument that fails

ChristianPunk
Posts: 1,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 9:52:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
"Would you think a building or car put itself together by random natural process? Or would you believe it had a designer? The same goes for life on earth."

Here's what ticks me off. Hypocrisy. Normally, when a theist, mainly Christians, use this argument, they don't realize it, but are trying to equal themselves to God by saying they can design LIKE God. They try to put themselves as Gods because of this. If there is anybody on this forum that uses this argument and thinks they are clever, I got a question for you. Could you create a spontaneous set of atoms? Can you control gravity? Can you create systems like the laws of physics and evolution and throw them into the use of our universe? Think before you go saying things like this creationist nonsense.
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Skepticalone
Posts: 6,083
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 11:56:44 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

Touche'
This thread is like eavesdropping on a conversation in a mental asylum. - Bulproof

You can call your invisible friends whatever you like. - Desmac

What the hell kind of coked up sideshow has this thread turned into. - Casten
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/8/2014 11:57:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

The argument itself just infers that patterns of intelligence are indicative of an intelligent designer. The argument isn't applied to an intelligent being to be indicative of a chain of superior intelligence.
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:17:01 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

What part of the human body demonstrates intelligent design?

Is it the eye with a lens which stiffens, yellows and clouds with age, only focuses about 5% of the field of view at any given time, has vessels running across the field of vision and connects the optic nerve to the center of the retina, creating a blind spot the brain has to attempt to fill?

Perhaps it's the throat where a single passage must be used for gases, liquids and solids, often resulting in the entire organism dying when solids block the passage for gasses?

Or maybe you're thinking of the genitalia which are located in the middle of the body's waste expulsion system.

Perhaps we should look at the liver which is completely without palpation ability. Only the capsule around the liver can produce pain stimulus, leaving one unaware of extreme liver dysfunction until swelling begins to stress the capsule - often at the point where the liver is too badly damaged to recover.

Check the crossed tendons between your smallest finger and your ring finger. This dramatically hampers digital dexterity.

We have joints which weaken and fail, bones which degenerate, break and leave us crippled. Sometimes people break their spine by sneezing or coughing.

What about cancer? That was an idea of pure brilliance! All it takes is a malfunction in apoptosis and our body begins to devour itself. It's a natural and normal part of life as this supposed designer intended it.

One might even call into question the logic of downward facing nostrils positioned right over the mouth.

The structures of the body demonstrate the results of a mindless mechanism serving the purpose of survival, or the designs of a blithering idiot.

Nothing we fing in nature produces the structures consistent That's exact;ly why it's so easy for you to notice things which are designed among those which aren't. Would you have any difficulty picking out a Cessna 172 sitting among the varies forms of saguaro cacti, plateaus and rock formations of a desert? Wouldn't you instantly spot a key or a wrist watch while walking along a beach?

This demonstrates the vast difference between that which results from natural processes and those resulting from intelligent design.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:42:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:17:01 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

What part of the human body demonstrates intelligent design?

Is it the eye with a lens which stiffens, yellows and clouds with age, only focuses about 5% of the field of view at any given time, has vessels running across the field of vision and connects the optic nerve to the center of the retina, creating a blind spot the brain has to attempt to fill?

Perhaps it's the throat where a single passage must be used for gases, liquids and solids, often resulting in the entire organism dying when solids block the passage for gasses?

Or maybe you're thinking of the genitalia which are located in the middle of the body's waste expulsion system.

Perhaps we should look at the liver which is completely without palpation ability. Only the capsule around the liver can produce pain stimulus, leaving one unaware of extreme liver dysfunction until swelling begins to stress the capsule - often at the point where the liver is too badly damaged to recover.

Check the crossed tendons between your smallest finger and your ring finger. This dramatically hampers digital dexterity.

We have joints which weaken and fail, bones which degenerate, break and leave us crippled. Sometimes people break their spine by sneezing or coughing.

What about cancer? That was an idea of pure brilliance! All it takes is a malfunction in apoptosis and our body begins to devour itself. It's a natural and normal part of life as this supposed designer intended it.

One might even call into question the logic of downward facing nostrils positioned right over the mouth.

The structures of the body demonstrate the results of a mindless mechanism serving the purpose of survival, or the designs of a blithering idiot.

Nothing we fing in nature produces the structures consistent That's exact;ly why it's so easy for you to notice things which are designed among those which aren't. Would you have any difficulty picking out a Cessna 172 sitting among the varies forms of saguaro cacti, plateaus and rock formations of a desert? Wouldn't you instantly spot a key or a wrist watch while walking along a beach?

This demonstrates the vast difference between that which results from natural processes and those resulting from intelligent design.

And a diamond is a filthy rock made from compressed dirt. An airplane is assembly of loosely held rusting metal parts. A computer is a virus prone device that emits radiation.

You're speaking to a very small minority if you're to appeal to an audience that believes the human body is a "design of a blithering idiot".
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:47:46 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:42:14 AM, Benshapiro wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:17:01 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

What part of the human body demonstrates intelligent design?

Is it the eye with a lens which stiffens, yellows and clouds with age, only focuses about 5% of the field of view at any given time, has vessels running across the field of vision and connects the optic nerve to the center of the retina, creating a blind spot the brain has to attempt to fill?

Perhaps it's the throat where a single passage must be used for gases, liquids and solids, often resulting in the entire organism dying when solids block the passage for gasses?

Or maybe you're thinking of the genitalia which are located in the middle of the body's waste expulsion system.

Perhaps we should look at the liver which is completely without palpation ability. Only the capsule around the liver can produce pain stimulus, leaving one unaware of extreme liver dysfunction until swelling begins to stress the capsule - often at the point where the liver is too badly damaged to recover.

Check the crossed tendons between your smallest finger and your ring finger. This dramatically hampers digital dexterity.

We have joints which weaken and fail, bones which degenerate, break and leave us crippled. Sometimes people break their spine by sneezing or coughing.

What about cancer? That was an idea of pure brilliance! All it takes is a malfunction in apoptosis and our body begins to devour itself. It's a natural and normal part of life as this supposed designer intended it.

One might even call into question the logic of downward facing nostrils positioned right over the mouth.

The structures of the body demonstrate the results of a mindless mechanism serving the purpose of survival, or the designs of a blithering idiot.

Nothing we fing in nature produces the structures consistent That's exact;ly why it's so easy for you to notice things which are designed among those which aren't. Would you have any difficulty picking out a Cessna 172 sitting among the varies forms of saguaro cacti, plateaus and rock formations of a desert? Wouldn't you instantly spot a key or a wrist watch while walking along a beach?

This demonstrates the vast difference between that which results from natural processes and those resulting from intelligent design.

And a diamond is a filthy rock made from compressed dirt. An airplane is assembly of loosely held rusting metal parts. A computer is a virus prone device that emits radiation.

You're speaking to a very small minority if you're to appeal to an audience that believes the human body is a "design of a blithering idiot".

The arguments just get wackier.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

And what about it would cause you to suggest that it's not salient? If the complexity of a human (or a proto-cell), indicates a designer, then certainly a far more complex, all-knowing, extra-temporal, all-powerful entity represents far greater complexity, and therefore, far more need for a designer.

The argument is much like saying that an abacus is so complex that it must have had a designer, but a quad-core microprocessor exists without a designer. The argument is completely self-defeating. If the neighbor child's soap box derby car required a designer, then his fathers, exotic luxury sedan certainly didn't come about by itself.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:54:45 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

And when your attempt at sarcasm is humiliated, you become lost and confused.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 1:58:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

As I've pointed out, I've seen it used multiple times and have used it myself.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:07:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 1:58:29 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

As I've pointed out, I've seen it used multiple times and have used it myself.

I was being sarcastic. Notice bully's attempt at sneaking in something: "allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us." Not a single person on here has alleged anything of the sort. He made it up. If indeed it has been alleged, then who alleged it? I'd like to know. If nobody did so, then I guess it's not alleged.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:10:34 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?

Why, He is merely a spirit-being. I've never harped upon any supposed "complexity" of God, nor do I know of any Christian on here that has done so. Do you? If so, name him/her.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
Benshapiro
Posts: 3,928
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:11:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?

Horribly retarded designs? More like intellectual dishonesty bias.
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:14:08 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:10:34 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?

Why, He is merely a spirit-being. I've never harped upon any supposed "complexity" of God, nor do I know of any Christian on here that has done so. Do you? If so, name him/her.

It's rather obviously implied in suggesting him to be eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc. Imagine a person with those traits and compare them to humans we know. You can't very well suggest that humans are more complex than the standard depiction of God.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:20:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Special pleading is not a refutation it's a cop out.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:20:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:14:08 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:10:34 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?

Why, He is merely a spirit-being. I've never harped upon any supposed "complexity" of God, nor do I know of any Christian on here that has done so. Do you? If so, name him/her.

It's rather obviously implied in suggesting him to be eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc. Imagine a person with those traits and compare them to humans we know. You can't very well suggest that humans are more complex than the standard depiction of God.

It's a totally different realm. God is depicted as merely a Spirit. I repeat: I've yet to see a Christian on here claiming that God is this enormously complex being, and it's never even crossed my mind. Again I ask: name the person who has made this allegation.

We've never claimed that God is complex nor that He had an origin. He is merely a Spirit. You can blabber on for days about "all-knowing" and "all-powerful", but those do not equate to complexity at all.

The argument appears to me to be based upon assumptions that no one is claiming, coupled with sophistry. Yet you think it's a real winner!
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:21:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:07:29 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:58:29 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

As I've pointed out, I've seen it used multiple times and have used it myself.

I was being sarcastic. Notice bully's attempt at sneaking in something: "allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us." Not a single person on here has alleged anything of the sort. He made it up. If indeed it has been alleged, then who alleged it? I'd like to know. If nobody did so, then I guess it's not alleged.
Theists.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:23:12 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:21:44 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:29 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:58:29 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

As I've pointed out, I've seen it used multiple times and have used it myself.

I was being sarcastic. Notice bully's attempt at sneaking in something: "allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us." Not a single person on here has alleged anything of the sort. He made it up. If indeed it has been alleged, then who alleged it? I'd like to know. If nobody did so, then I guess it's not alleged.
Theists.

Name one who's said it. I've never seen it, but that doesn't mean that you haven't.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
bulproof
Posts: 25,175
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:24:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:23:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:21:44 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:29 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:58:29 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

As I've pointed out, I've seen it used multiple times and have used it myself.

I was being sarcastic. Notice bully's attempt at sneaking in something: "allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us." Not a single person on here has alleged anything of the sort. He made it up. If indeed it has been alleged, then who alleged it? I'd like to know. If nobody did so, then I guess it's not alleged.
Theists.

Name one who's said it. I've never seen it, but that doesn't mean that you haven't.

Theists in general and your holy book of spells in particular.

Why can't you know the mind of god?
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
Beastt
Posts: 5,135
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:25:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:20:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:14:08 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:10:34 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?

Why, He is merely a spirit-being. I've never harped upon any supposed "complexity" of God, nor do I know of any Christian on here that has done so. Do you? If so, name him/her.

It's rather obviously implied in suggesting him to be eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc. Imagine a person with those traits and compare them to humans we know. You can't very well suggest that humans are more complex than the standard depiction of God.

It's a totally different realm. God is depicted as merely a Spirit. I repeat: I've yet to see a Christian on here claiming that God is this enormously complex being, and it's never even crossed my mind. Again I ask: name the person who has made this allegation.

We've never claimed that God is complex nor that He had an origin. He is merely a Spirit. You can blabber on for days about "all-knowing" and "all-powerful", but those do not equate to complexity at all.

The argument appears to me to be based upon assumptions that no one is claiming, coupled with sophistry. Yet you think it's a real winner!

No Anna. If all of the complexity in the universe came from God, then God must have at least the complexity of the universe. And if it required a designer due to that complexity, then so does God. And conversely, if God didn't need a designer, then neither did the universe.

And you can throw a saddle on this dead horse and beat it all night. You really have nowhere to ride, and your dead horse won't take you anywhere.
"If we believe absurdities we shall commit atrocities." -- Voltaire
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:31:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:24:55 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:23:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:21:44 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:29 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:58:29 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:51:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:50:42 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That is because it is the definitive, unarguable refutation of the ID absurdity.

Then why don't we see it all the time on here? Can they not copy and paste it?

As I've pointed out, I've seen it used multiple times and have used it myself.

I was being sarcastic. Notice bully's attempt at sneaking in something: "allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us." Not a single person on here has alleged anything of the sort. He made it up. If indeed it has been alleged, then who alleged it? I'd like to know. If nobody did so, then I guess it's not alleged.
Theists.

Name one who's said it. I've never seen it, but that doesn't mean that you haven't.

Theists in general and your holy book of spells in particular.

Why can't you know the mind of god?

If theists in general have said it, then why can't you name one on here? I've never seen one who was willing to tackle such speculations regarding the complexity of a Spirit being. Who was it?
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
annanicole
Posts: 19,782
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/9/2014 2:38:36 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 9/9/2014 2:25:33 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:20:58 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:14:08 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:10:34 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:07:52 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 2:05:30 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:54:22 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:48:12 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/9/2014 1:27:20 AM, Beastt wrote:
At 9/9/2014 12:23:36 AM, annanicole wrote:
At 9/8/2014 11:52:18 PM, bulproof wrote:
At 9/8/2014 10:07:04 PM, Benshapiro wrote:
An atheist would probably point out that we've assembled buildings, cars, computers, etc., but nothing in the natural universe exhibit evidence of intelligent designing like the above examples.

To that I'd say look in the mirror. Supposedly nature designed the face and the body and all the processes within that you're looking at. A human body is exponentially more complex and exhibits much more evidence of intelligent design than any building, car, or computer we could ever build.

And allegedly your god is exponentially more complex than us and by your argument must have been designed.

First time we've ever seen that one on here ...............

That's because it's a very salient point. Why do you see that as a flaw?

I would hardly call it salient. I was saying that nobody on here had ever come up with "the designer must have had a designer."

Really? How odd, since I've seen it used at least a half dozen times and have drawn attention to that point myself.

... and when attention is called to the fact that God is (1) very, very simple and (2) had no origin in the first place, what were the quibbles offered in reply?

Aside from the assertion that God is responsible for all of the horribly retarded designs we see, in what definition for God is he suggested to be "simple"?

Why, He is merely a spirit-being. I've never harped upon any supposed "complexity" of God, nor do I know of any Christian on here that has done so. Do you? If so, name him/her.

It's rather obviously implied in suggesting him to be eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc. Imagine a person with those traits and compare them to humans we know. You can't very well suggest that humans are more complex than the standard depiction of God.

It's a totally different realm. God is depicted as merely a Spirit. I repeat: I've yet to see a Christian on here claiming that God is this enormously complex being, and it's never even crossed my mind. Again I ask: name the person who has made this allegation.

We've never claimed that God is complex nor that He had an origin. He is merely a Spirit. You can blabber on for days about "all-knowing" and "all-powerful", but those do not equate to complexity at all.

The argument appears to me to be based upon assumptions that no one is claiming, coupled with sophistry. Yet you think it's a real winner!

No Anna. If all of the complexity in the universe came from God, then God must have at least the complexity of the universe.

How'd you come up with that one? Make it up just like your council vote after forty-three years of bickering? Repeat: no theist on here that I know of has ever adduced that God is an extremely complex Being.

And if it required a designer due to that complexity, then so does God. And conversely, if God didn't need a designer, then neither did the universe.

And you can throw a saddle on this dead horse and beat it all night. You really have nowhere to ride, and your dead horse won't take you anywhere.

If anyone's saddled up on a dead horse, it's you. I've told you half a dozen times that no theist on here of which I am aware has stated that (1) God is an extremely complex Being, or (2) that He had an origin. You haven't named anyone yet - and I don't think you will.

Intelligence does not equal complexity. Power does not equal complexity. I have stated, and the Bible states, that God is a Spirit, or "God is Spirit".

Now if you get your kicks by coming up with imaginary "complexity", a complexity which no theist on here has affirmed, then go right ahead. I'm not going to stop you.

Just remember, when the dust settles: (1) No theist on here has affirmed that God, being a Spirit-being is extremely complex or (2) that God has an origin in the first place. So when you desire to assume one or both of those, 'tis you who is beating (or riding) a dead horse.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."