Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Confusing mice with mousetraps
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 76 of 90 (203997)
04-30-2005 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Phat
04-16-2005 11:35 AM


Re: Everything a fantasy in god's mind?
Whats a theist supposed to say? According to your logic, you exist for a miniscule sum of time on a dust speck of a planet in a somewhat rare solar system (so far as logic has currently informed us) within one of a hundred billion galaxies. Despite being so insignificant in the grand scheme of things, you think it better to try and arrive at lifes conclusions without any help from any sort of a Creator whom could exist!
So you think that mankind is the reason the universe exists?
There exists (in my belief) an unseen spiritual realm of unknown origin and motive around us as we think. The Holy Spirit is there too, and He patiently awaits our acknowledgement and acceptence.
Yet humanity, in all of our quirkiness and ill placed arrogance, brushes off any communion with this loving Creator!
We would rather peer through our puny telescopes and microscopes that we have invented and attempt to go it alone...bringing our insignificant species into the destiny that WE..somehow...have imagined for ourselves!
We have no means of seeing the unseen, at least the telescopes are looking at the real world.
Is a cosmic "old man" so illogical?
When we are young, fathers seem all-powerful, then we transfer the belief to an all-powerfull cosmic daddy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Phat, posted 04-16-2005 11:35 AM Phat has not replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 77 of 90 (204000)
04-30-2005 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by Peter
04-29-2005 8:17 AM


Re: Design Detection
I doubt there IS any way of detecting design 'by inspection'.
Yes, it seems to me that if we could detect design, that would mean that the designer had someting in comon with us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Peter, posted 04-29-2005 8:17 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Peter, posted 05-03-2005 8:28 AM tsig has replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 78 of 90 (204321)
05-02-2005 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Phat
04-12-2005 3:42 AM


Re: Everything a fantasy in god's mind?
DHA writes:
Yes, but that would mean that god is a liar.
Oh Come Now! How ever would we know?
Does that mean that it is perfectly OK to lie so long as nobody finds out?
That sounds a bit messed up to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Phat, posted 04-12-2005 3:42 AM Phat has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Phat, posted 05-02-2005 3:11 PM PurpleYouko has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 79 of 90 (204358)
05-02-2005 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by PurpleYouko
05-02-2005 12:51 PM


We cannot be legends in our own minds
I was being facetious. When examining or declaring something to be a lie, one is thus assuming a source of truth.
Human wisdom is NOT the origen of truth.
God is truth.
Human wisdom can deny God, yet cannot replace Him as a source of truth.
Only an all knowing source can illuminate forth an all knowing wisdom.
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 05-02-2005 01:12 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by PurpleYouko, posted 05-02-2005 12:51 PM PurpleYouko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by PurpleYouko, posted 05-02-2005 5:24 PM Phat has not replied

  
PurpleYouko
Member
Posts: 714
From: Columbia Missouri
Joined: 11-11-2004


Message 80 of 90 (204386)
05-02-2005 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 79 by Phat
05-02-2005 3:11 PM


Re: We cannot be legends in our own minds
I was being facetious.
Yes I know. So was I.
Seriously though, it really doesn't make much sense that God would deliberately deceive us that way.
If the world was created last Thursday at 4pm (eastern sea-board) then all of history is a complete fabrication, the bible included.
It means that Jesus didn't die for our sins. We are just being told that he did when in fact none of it ever happened. That is a bare faced lie in anybody's book and makes a total mockery of everything that ever happened.
I just don't buy that as an option.
AdminNosy: This train of thought has a chance of derailing this thread. Please don't continue with it.
This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 05-03-2005 11:25 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Phat, posted 05-02-2005 3:11 PM Phat has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 81 of 90 (204588)
05-03-2005 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by tsig
04-30-2005 6:30 PM


Re: Design Detection
I don't believe that we can directly detect design
in objects that we KNOW have been designed by other
humans.
So commonality with the supposed designer is irrelevant.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by tsig, posted 04-30-2005 6:30 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by tsig, posted 05-05-2005 4:54 AM Peter has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 82 of 90 (205154)
05-05-2005 4:54 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by Peter
05-03-2005 8:28 AM


Re: Design Detection
I don't believe that we can directly detect design
in objects that we KNOW have been designed by other
humans.
So commonality with the supposed designer is irrelevant.
I'm having a hard time understanding this post, do you mean we can't know that the great pyramid is designed?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by Peter, posted 05-03-2005 8:28 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Peter, posted 08-12-2005 6:07 AM tsig has replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 83 of 90 (232507)
08-12-2005 6:07 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by tsig
05-05-2005 4:54 AM


Re: Design Detection
Yes.
Just by looking at an artifact we cannot say that
it was designed. We assume design based upon experience
of designed objects, but that's not the same as formally
determining that something was designed.
We assume that the great pyramid was designed since it conforms
to our knowledge of 'designed' buildings/structures. It is composed
of blocks (which we know are used by people in construction) and
possibly we can still detect some tool marks on the stones.
It's still an assumption not a strict determination. It requires
KNOWLEDGE that such things ARE designed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by tsig, posted 05-05-2005 4:54 AM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by tsig, posted 08-12-2005 5:43 PM Peter has replied
 Message 85 by ramoss, posted 08-12-2005 6:20 PM Peter has replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 84 of 90 (232762)
08-12-2005 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Peter
08-12-2005 6:07 AM


Re: Design Detection
Yes.
Just by looking at an artifact we cannot say that
it was designed. We assume design based upon experience
of designed objects, but that's not the same as formally
determining that something was designed.
We assume that the great pyramid was designed since it conforms
to our knowledge of 'designed' buildings/structures. It is composed
of blocks (which we know are used by people in construction) and
possibly we can still detect some tool marks on the stones.
It's still an assumption not a strict determination. It requires
KNOWLEDGE that such things ARE designed.
Where would we gain this knowledge? From the pyramid, I would think.
With the bar this high, how can you prove anything is designed?
This message has been edited by DHA, 08-12-2005 05:47 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Peter, posted 08-12-2005 6:07 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Peter, posted 08-15-2005 3:23 AM tsig has replied

  
ramoss
Member (Idle past 612 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004


Message 85 of 90 (232777)
08-12-2005 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by Peter
08-12-2005 6:07 AM


Re: Design Detection
I disagree. We can tell that it was designed by anumber of ways. First of all, the shape and location of the blocks.. and the fact that the origin of the blocks is not from the site where the pyramids reside.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Peter, posted 08-12-2005 6:07 AM Peter has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by tsig, posted 08-12-2005 7:19 PM ramoss has not replied
 Message 88 by Peter, posted 08-15-2005 3:27 AM ramoss has not replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 86 of 90 (232795)
08-12-2005 7:19 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by ramoss
08-12-2005 6:20 PM


It's a pyramid
I disagree. We can tell that it was designed by anumber of ways. First of all, the shape and location of the blocks.. and the fact that the origin of the blocks is not from the site where the pyramids reside.
And the fact that it is a pyramid; not to many natural ones.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by ramoss, posted 08-12-2005 6:20 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 87 of 90 (233320)
08-15-2005 3:23 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by tsig
08-12-2005 5:43 PM


Re: Design Detection
You cannot prove that anything is designed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by tsig, posted 08-12-2005 5:43 PM tsig has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Brad McFall, posted 08-15-2005 7:41 AM Peter has seen this message but not replied
 Message 90 by tsig, posted 08-15-2005 8:43 AM Peter has seen this message but not replied

  
Peter
Member (Idle past 1479 days)
Posts: 2161
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 88 of 90 (233321)
08-15-2005 3:27 AM
Reply to: Message 85 by ramoss
08-12-2005 6:20 PM


Re: Design Detection
I thought I already said that.
We infer design from knowledge of similar things that
we KNOW were designed.
Without knowledge of similar design there would be nothing
to (objectively) identify anything as designed or not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by ramoss, posted 08-12-2005 6:20 PM ramoss has not replied

  
Brad McFall
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3428
From: Ithaca,NY, USA
Joined: 12-20-2001


Message 89 of 90 (233339)
08-15-2005 7:41 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Peter
08-15-2005 3:23 AM


Re: Design Detection
Do you mean by "prove", proof in the mathematical sense? What if teleonomy* gave a logical structure that matched a cellullar automata class statistically ruled first by things NOT biologically subect to natural selection and enabled a human to construct an axiom system that futhermore logically connected the form of both the math(s) and the sorting of alternative alleles??
*
quote:
Teleonomy would not be a branch of the study of evolution. Its first concern with biological phenomenon would be to answer the question: "What is its function?"
GCWILLIAMS Adapation and Selection 1966.
This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 08-15-2005 07:55 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Peter, posted 08-15-2005 3:23 AM Peter has seen this message but not replied

  
tsig
Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 738
From: USA
Joined: 04-09-2004


Message 90 of 90 (233355)
08-15-2005 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by Peter
08-15-2005 3:23 AM


Re: Design Detection
You cannot prove that anything is designed.
Ask Percy about this site, he designed it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Peter, posted 08-15-2005 3:23 AM Peter has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024