The evidence for design and a designer

For as many times that you have alluded to your abilities, you have failed to live up to them. You have 2k+ posts at EvC and have, so far, failed to make a case for anything.Just to stay on topic and not get accused of being inflammatory: Please explain this one. What does evolution say about the "eternal existence of matter"?

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

You should know very well (since you are such a seasoned public debater in the evo-creo arena) that evolution has fuck all to do with origins. If you knew so much about evolution, you would know that it could occur whether there was a magic sky daddy farting atoms into existence, abiogenesis occurring, transpermia etc. Nope, not at all. You see, different fields of science have a neat way of not trying to overlap one another. The field of, let's say: Evolutionary Biology, has no business in bothering with where it all came from or "the eternal existence of matter". Cosmology is the field that is trying to work that out. Nor does the Theory of Evolution have any say so on the origins of matter.While, yes, you could have a discussion about the origins of matter when dealing with someone who accepts evolution as opposed to ID and ask them where they think matter came from, it would have absolutely NO BEARING on evolution whatsoever.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

....but but but DB isn't advocating for a biblical designer, Buz. DB is an IDist...... They claim there is a difference.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

No, Buz. IDist, not deist. BIG difference. ID pays lip service alone to claiming themselves separate from religionists. They claim the designer is not "god", or that they don't know who or what the designer is (even though we know full well they are creationists in disguise).

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

What are you smoking, Buz? There are only 2 members on this board that I can think of off the top of my head who claim to be Deists: RAZD and Percy (correct me, Percy, if I am wrong). You are the only one conflating the two terms, since you are the one who brought it up. You DO know what ID is, correct? You DO know what the ID movement is, correct?As far as the definition you quoted, it is far more widely accepted that Deists do not ascribe to "god" as YOU know it. It is more of a belief in "A" god. If you wish to start a thread wherein you conflate the terms further, I (and a few others I am sure) would be glad to participate.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

You are arguing for design from the standpoint of intelligent design. You ARE taking the ID standpoint. If you can't be honest with yourself, how can we expect you to be honest with us? So now you are also going to conflate the two terms as well?

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

English isn't your first language, is it? You will notice that I said it has "FUCK ALL" to do with origins, meaning it has nothing to do with origins.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

So, now that you understand that evolution has FUCK ALL to do with origins, do you plan on recanting your drivel about the "eternal existence of matter", since it has nothing to do with anything currently being discussed.From your Message 146: You have yet to provide any sort of mechanism with which to test for the design you tout. All you have done is shout "look, I'm logical. It's logical!. It's logical!" without saying much of anything else. How do we know what is designed and what is natural? Like your title implies, where is the evidence for design?p.s.: You might try growing up so you're not so easily offended by words, pussy face.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.