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: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Discussion on Creation article...
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 57 of 95 (339489)
08-12-2006 5:05 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by mr_matrix
08-11-2006 2:10 PM


Re: mr_matrix manages more mangled misinformation misrepresentations
YOu also failed to give examples of bad design in nature (because no such thing exists).
So the millions of children that suffer and die each year from God-created diseases are part of the Grand Design? The parasites that cripple and blind us were designed from the start? The bacteria and viri we fight should be allowed to run their course because the ID wants it that way? Sounds like the sickest God I ever heard of.
Edited by Nighttrain, : Spell error

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by mr_matrix, posted 08-11-2006 2:10 PM mr_matrix has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by mr_matrix, posted 08-15-2006 1:36 PM Nighttrain has replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 71 of 95 (340409)
08-15-2006 9:51 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by mr_matrix
08-15-2006 1:36 PM


Re: Bad design is a myth
Obviously, this is a very invalid example and you cannot consider deseases an mutations as bad design. Just what do you want God to do in order for you to admit intellegent design? Create a life for humans with absolutely no diseases, no body gets tired or hurt, nobody experiences unfortunate events, nobody dies and everyone is immortal and lives forever in a happy utopia?!! This kind of perfect life is only in paradise and not in the worldy life. This life is intentionally designed with some difficulties and harsh conditions, and diseases are part of these difficulties and they do not constitute examples of bad design. I am sure that you still wont understand what Im saying since you dont believe in God in the first plance.
Ah, the old 'how would you understand it, you`re not a believer' nonsense.
Au contraire, I think diseases are a very good example of design. So effective, so difficult to cure, some even have a near 100% mortality result. Can`t knock that kill rate. Just what you would expect from a kind, loving God. One that gives you freewill. Must have come as a shock to believers who saw their babies and children die in agony before experiencing all that Godly Love. Let alone freewill. But 'Intelligent'? I think not.
Immortality? Let`s see what we have to fight before we add the disease overload:
Gravity
Solar radiation
Toxic plants
Toxic minerals
Gases, like radon, Co, Co2, methane, etc.
Environment--heat, cold, drought,atmospheric contamination (and not from Man)
Natural Events (Acts of God)floods,famines,earthquakes,eruptions,tsunamis,tornados,hurricanes
Predators--animal,reptile,insect,marine
Bacteria-on and within our bodies (was it 213 species at last count?)
Parasites--fleas,ticks,leeches,flies,mosquitoes (all lining up to carry disease),tapeworms and their wriggly relations, flukes
Fungi
If it stung, bit or consumed, God lined them up.
But of course, God wasn`t content with that little load, He had to add the diseases. Not just any old disease. No, He specialised in crippling, eating, maiming, blinding, fevering,painful diseases. Lifetime diseases. Fatal diseases. Like any self-respecting Designer would do.[/switches off irony]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by mr_matrix, posted 08-15-2006 1:36 PM mr_matrix has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 74 of 95 (340418)
08-16-2006 12:05 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by RAZD
08-15-2006 10:27 PM


Re: mr_matrix STILL manages more mangled misinformation misrepresentations
the problem is not in what they believe but in what they deny in the process. The denial of evolution does not make it any less real, any less
Great line, Razd. Mind if I use it?
Redacted--It`s not what you believe, but what you deny.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by RAZD, posted 08-15-2006 10:27 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by RAZD, posted 08-16-2006 7:14 AM Nighttrain has not replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 90 of 95 (340962)
08-17-2006 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Brad McFall
08-17-2006 6:36 PM


Re: Flying snakes
Yet when I asked Richard Lewontin who mentioned the flat nature of sea snake tails in the "Dialectical Biologist" how it got it's spots he only had had the thought (dynamically) about how fish got their tails
Hi, Brad. One subject I`ve never heard resolved is the belief of camouflage, especially in a marine environment. Marine biologists speak of the development of spots, stripes, change of colour, appendages, etc. as an survival mechanism to blend in with their surroundings. And they do. Yet we have many marine species, usually sedentary or reef-dwellers, that are extremely noticeable due to patterning or clash of colours. Sort of goes against the idea of hiding from predators. Any thoughts?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Brad McFall, posted 08-17-2006 6:36 PM Brad McFall has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Brad McFall, posted 08-18-2006 10:35 AM Nighttrain has not replied
 Message 92 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-19-2006 9:46 AM Nighttrain has replied

  
Nighttrain
Member (Idle past 3993 days)
Posts: 1512
From: brisbane,australia
Joined: 06-08-2004


Message 94 of 95 (341518)
08-19-2006 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Dr Adequate
08-19-2006 9:46 AM


The colour spectrum
Most of the bright coloured species I`ve come across on dives around coral reefs don`t become ground-huggers when predators call, but continue to swim at a distance from shelter, just relying on numbers or evasion to survive. The colours aren`t developed with a background in mind as they stand out regardless of deep water or reef backdrop. Swimming in a school of like-coloured objects doesn`t seem to favour mating selection (who to choose?). While colour as a deterrent to edibility seems irrelevant when the shades cover the spectrum from b/w through blue/green to bright yellows and reds. The sneaky behavior of sharks covering themselves in a silver-grey cloak doesn`t work either, because you can see agitation in a school long before the predator becomes visible.
tropical fish - Google Search

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-19-2006 9:46 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-20-2006 12:26 AM Nighttrain has 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