The evidence for design and a designer - AS OF 10/27, SUMMARY MESSAGES ONLY

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.

The ONLY people who need an eternal anything are religious folk. There is nothing about the world the rest of us live in that necessitates an eternal anything. Alternative to what, exactly? Design?
Mechanism for what, exactly? Life? Says the person who couldn't formulate a cogent statement to save his life...... Oddly enough, I have yet to provide "my" mechanism for anything. We are still trying to figure out what the fuck you are talking about.... Quite so. Now, I think it's time for you to come back to reality and formulate a coherent argument instead of repeating "logic logic logic logic" over and over again. And you're an imbecilic assclown who sucks cock in hell. Isn't this fun? (thanks for moving this to FFA, Herr Direktor.)

---

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

Then all you have been championing for falls flat on it's face. You see, we can witness life being created with NO need for any designer. That is the logical conclusion (since you don't want to test for the design). Of course you don't....because you have no interest in being taken seriously. Now, on the other hand, if you actually had a clear thought in your head and actually wanted to be taken seriously: yes, you do need experiments. "It looks designed" means nothing because guess what? It doesn't look designed to me. So now your proposition has become highly subjective and yet you fail to even attempt to promote said proposition so as to convince anyone outside of your head to the validity of it. Maybe in the meth induced dream you are living in, but not the real world. Just because there is order, that does not dictate design. There is this thing called nature. Go outside once in a while and witness order that occurs naturally: no designer needed. Oh, but no. You want to claim that there IS a designer needed, but you want to get away with just saying so. It's almost as if you think your designer has his hand in every single event that happens everywhere. Every tree, every koala, every blade of grass.

---

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

You seem to be the only one saying anything about "eternal matter". Well, when I was banging my ex-wife conceiving my son, there was no "designer" involved...... That is the point I was making. Of course we assume that BECAUSE THERE IS NO EVIDENCE FOR A DESIGNER. You assume that the FSM isn't the designer, why is that? Do you not understand that YOU are the one here making wild ass claims? YOU need to ante up with some tests, not us. This thread is about design. It is YOUR thread and you have provided diddly. YOU are the only one here saying anything about eternal matter. Nope. Have you ever watched a water droplet being dropped onto a pool of water? After it hits the surface and bounces back up, it forms a perfect sphere. Was that water drop designed immediately after it hit the surface of the water?Oooh, now you are going to say that your designer designed the laws that allow for for that perfect sphere, right? Well, if that is your answer, you actually DO have some more to prove..since now we can see natural order occurring, we can LOGICALLY deduce no designer UNTIL YOU PROVIDE A TEST OR EVIDENCE FOR SAID DESIGNER. Savvy that, son?

---

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

So, you are saying NO order happens on it's own and your designer has it's hands in every little aspect of everything? The droplet of water I mentioned: your designer did that too? I fear you are projecting your own inadequacies onto others, my dear boy. Go back and read what I posted. Take a gander at the circle of life. All natural and can be explained without the need for any designer. Look at a walnut seed. We can watch it from seed to sapling to tree. That is order, is it not? Was your designer there to make it grow? IF so, how do you know that? How can you prove it?You are asserting something that only convolutes matters, all the while saying "prove I am wrong" as if you can just have any old hair brained idea become accepted without proving it to be correct.If I am wrong, please feel free to explain yourself better. However, I know you won't and will just say you are the only rational person ever.{abe} Are you really asking for evidence that things happen naturally? Have you ever taken a nature hike? Have you ever looked at nature? WHERE IS YOUR DESIGNER????? NATURE happens naturally. The life we see EVERY DAY happens naturally: no mythical creatures necessary.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

---

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

No it doesn't. As soon as you describe your process, we can continue. Unless you plan on saying "I don't understand evolution so it MUST be design" because that is exactly what it looks like. You continually duck and dodge and try to respond to our questions by asking us questions. Nice try, but no thanks. What does this have to do with "The evidence for design and a designer"? Remember, YOU started this thread and have yet to explain, well, anything. Furthermore, do you plan on discussing life as we see it NOW or how it came into existence? I feel that discussing both won't fit too well in one topic as it is a VERY broad scope....{abe}
Having said the above statement and thought about it, it would appear to me that you think your "logical order something something logic order order is logical yada yada" encompasses everything from pre-big bang all the way to modern medicine, all the while remaining as vague as possible. You can't give us a single experiment (hell, you say you don't NEED experiments), yet you basically wish to replace or compete with almost ALL of natural science.Once you can take a deep breath and have someone else take over your account that isn't a fucking moron, I think we can continue. Yes. You need a mental capacity test.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.Edited by hooah212002, : added some mumbo jumbo

---

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

Buz, you realize you are playing for our team when you wholeheartedly admit ID is creationism, right? I'm not sure if you know this, but ID hasn't publicly come out of the closet. They still deny their religious ties...... Keep it up, buddy. We appreciate it.

---

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

Am I the only one who is not surprised that this thread, entitled "evidence for design and a designer", has devolved into what evolution does, all the while failing to even work out what can be called evidence for design? When-oh-when will ID/creation attempt to stand on it's own merit?

---

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