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:   The evidence for design and a designer - AS OF 10/27, SUMMARY MESSAGES ONLY
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 226 of 648 (587557)
10-19-2010 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Dawn Bertot
10-19-2010 1:10 PM


Dawn Bertot writes:
Or all you need to do is show me the test that tests for matter eternal.
Who, other than you, makes a claim that matter is eternal?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-19-2010 1:10 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 232 of 648 (587595)
10-19-2010 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by Dawn Bertot
10-19-2010 5:11 PM


Re: The third possibility
Dawn Bertot writes:
So, is there a test to demonstrate the eternality of matter.
No one but you has ever even mentioned "the eternality of matter" whatever that even means.
It is also totally irrelevant to the question I asked.
quote:
And you will not address the evidence for a designer (a key point if there is design) or show why the designer, even if true, is relevant or of any significance.
Even if there were some designer, why is that of any relevance, importance or significance beyond the two areas I have mentioned repeatedly, as a historical footnote or in cases of Product Liability suits?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-19-2010 5:11 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 250 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-20-2010 1:55 AM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 241 of 648 (587616)
10-19-2010 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 239 by Buzsaw
10-19-2010 6:51 PM


Re: The Biblical Designer Did The Whole Enchilada
IDists seem to just make stuff up and avoid discussion. For example not one IDist has ever presented a single example of the observed processes or model of the imagined designer.
And the question remains, "What value or significance is there to the designer even if it existed?"

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by Buzsaw, posted 10-19-2010 6:51 PM Buzsaw has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 278 of 648 (587698)
10-20-2010 10:14 AM
Reply to: Message 250 by Dawn Bertot
10-20-2010 1:55 AM


Re: The third possibility
Dawn Bertot writes:
No one but you has ever even mentioned "the eternality of matter" whatever that even means.
Its a natural conclusion of your position, genius. Its something that needs to be addressed.
If I am required to show proof of my design, which is obvious order, what is your conclusion of your studies and how in this world do you demonstrate it. Would your claim be matter eternal or what? What would your choice be
avoiding this very valid point wont help you
Let me repeat. No one but you has asserted or even mentioned "the eternality of matter" whatever that even means. Of course matter is not eternal, we can see examples of it being created or destroyed all the time.
Second, no one has asked you to show proof of your design, they have asked you to show evidence of the design and explain how to differentiate between something designed or not designed.
My conclusion from my studies is that the things we can observe, totally natural processes can explain the world we see around us.
So far no other model has ever been presented.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Oh yeah before I forget, are you going to explain in detail the other possibilites outside the two, Im still waiting
But I have explained them in as much detail as has been offered for any other possibilities.
I listed other possibilities.
If you ask me to show evidence for the other possibilities I listed I would have to reply "Just as there is no evidence for design or some designer, I see no evidence for any of the other possibilities or that any of the other possibilities explain anything better than the conventional theories."
And you in turn still avoid the real question.
Even if there were some designer, why is that of any relevance, importance or significance beyond the two areas I have mentioned repeatedly, as a historical footnote or in cases of Product Liability suits?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 250 by Dawn Bertot, posted 10-20-2010 1:55 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 292 of 648 (587733)
10-20-2010 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 291 by Taq
10-20-2010 12:54 PM


Re: Logical Fallacy
What Dawn Bertot seems to forget is that the crystals grow based on the very same natural processes even if YOU keep your eyes shut tight and yet forget to repeat "I do believe in Designers, I do believe in Designers."

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Taq, posted 10-20-2010 12:54 PM Taq has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 378 of 648 (587936)
10-21-2010 1:44 PM
Reply to: Message 377 by Taq
10-21-2010 1:40 PM


Re: Clear purpose
The purpose of a watch is to allow the designer to tell the time.
Wearer to tell time?
The designers purpose was to create a product to sell.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by Taq, posted 10-21-2010 1:40 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 379 by Taq, posted 10-21-2010 1:51 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 381 of 648 (587943)
10-21-2010 2:02 PM
Reply to: Message 379 by Taq
10-21-2010 1:51 PM


Re: Clear purpose
I don't mean to seem pedantic but Dawn and Dennis are pretty loose in actually defining purpose. The point I am trying to make is that the watch itself has NO purpose. The designer had a purpose and the wearer has a purpose but both are totally independent of the watch itself and in fact, the purpose of both the designer and the wearer could be fulfilled even if the watch did not exist. The designer is doing a job to earn money. It could be designing watches or tailfins. The wearer could look at the sun or stars or a sundial or use any of the myriad other methods developed to tell time.
Dawn and Dennis are just making stuff up and trying to lead folk off down those very attractive rabbit holes.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 379 by Taq, posted 10-21-2010 1:51 PM Taq has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 453 of 648 (588114)
10-22-2010 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 413 by dennis780
10-22-2010 5:08 AM


Please stop saying Really, Really Stupid things.
How do you measure earth? Can't answer it? Hmm. Thats because it's stupid question.
When you make statements like that all you accomplish is to show how utterly clueless you are about just about everything.
There are many, many ways to measure the earth and anyone over about twelve should have the basics needed for most of the methods.
You have been asked a real question yet you are so ignorant that you really don't know how to answer.
Ignorance though can be cured and lead you out of the darkness of Satan and into to light of science.
The smart thing for you to do would be to admit just how utterly ignorant you are and ask some of the wiser folk here to teach you.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 413 by dennis780, posted 10-22-2010 5:08 AM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 489 by dennis780, posted 10-22-2010 11:41 PM jar has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 462 of 648 (588141)
10-22-2010 1:04 PM
Reply to: Message 414 by dennis780
10-22-2010 5:11 AM


who saw evolution?
So far everyone who has looked.
I have. And...
It was confirmed by the geologists.
It was confirmed by all the oil explorers.
It was confirmed by all the paleontologists.
It was confirmed by all the biologists.
The fact of evolution is written in the very oil we burn, the coal we use, the food we eat, the building we build, the ground we walk on.
Only those who are willfully blind do not see it.
Now, since I answered your question, how about giving me one reason that even if there was some designer it is of any importance other than as an historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by dennis780, posted 10-22-2010 5:11 AM dennis780 has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 481 of 648 (588212)
10-22-2010 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 480 by dennis780
10-22-2010 10:16 PM


The wheels that fell off the donkey cart arrived here it seems
So I need not bring up the chariot wheels found at the bottom of the Red Sea, along a sand bar the stretches across it, right where the Bible claims Moses parted the sea with his staff, and the Egyptians were consumed by it.
Too funny. Maybe you will actually be the very first person that can actually present even a shred of evidence in support of that nonsense.
Of course, even if you could support that assertion it would add zero support to the topic of this thread.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 480 by dennis780, posted 10-22-2010 10:16 PM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 494 by dennis780, posted 10-23-2010 12:03 AM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 522 of 648 (588269)
10-23-2010 9:41 AM
Reply to: Message 494 by dennis780
10-23-2010 12:03 AM


Re: The wheels that fell off the donkey cart arrived here it seems
Thanks for that link because it is a great example of what problems you face.
There is no evidence at that site, in fact it is absolutely nothing but more examples of how Creationists simply copy from each other, never try to verify their claims and how the Christian Cult of Ignorance simply accept crap like that site and Ron Wyatt's Archeological Research without question.
I did not go off topic, I replied to yet another false assertion that you made; and it is on topic because it once again demonstrated that you have no idea what evidence even is and so are totally clueless about how to even go about supporting design or some designer.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 494 by dennis780, posted 10-23-2010 12:03 AM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 644 by dennis780, posted 10-28-2010 2:23 AM jar has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 523 of 648 (588271)
10-23-2010 9:59 AM
Reply to: Message 498 by dennis780
10-23-2010 12:22 AM


Re: Literalism
You just love being wrong don't you?
Look at the maps in your link. They are yet another great example of the ignorance of so many Biblical Literalists.
Note where it says:
quote:
The Admirality map of the Red Sea showing depth measurements.
Blue dotted line follows lowest depths as they seem to be indicated today.
First, anyone that has even basic geography knowledge of the area can see that the lower map is NOT of the Red Sea but of the Gulf of Aqaba.
Second, there is NO sandbar shown, and the dotted line someone just added. Note that they also omitted the legend that shows how depths are shown. The reality is that the depth of the Gulf of Aqaba is between 400 and 1800 METERS.
Learn what evidence really is. Stop just accepting the nonsense these folk are selling you.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 498 by dennis780, posted 10-23-2010 12:22 AM dennis780 has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 533 of 648 (588288)
10-23-2010 1:45 PM
Reply to: Message 532 by Just being real
10-23-2010 1:31 PM


more misrepresentation
"Junk DNA" and Vestigial Organs were NOT used as evidence against design except as a strawman on the Creationist sites, but they lie for a living.
Vestigial organs are still guess what...? Vestigial organs. The appendix and tonsils are still pieces parts that we can easily do without and that serve no modern function.
But the topic in case you missed it is "The evidence for design and a designer " and so far no one has presented any such evidence.
Even more importantly, no one has addressed the very real issue that even if there was some designer it is of no interest, use, value or importance except as some historical footnote or in cases of Product Liability suits.
Is there any chance you might have something related to the topic to contribute other than whining and word salad?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 532 by Just being real, posted 10-23-2010 1:31 PM Just being real has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 534 by Just being real, posted 10-23-2010 2:03 PM jar has replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 535 of 648 (588290)
10-23-2010 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 534 by Just being real
10-23-2010 2:03 PM


Re: more misrepresentation
Jbr writes:
I have been involved with this debate for many years now and I promise you I could go out and buy a new car if I had a nickle for every time I have had an evolutionary atheist use one of those arguments on me.
I simply don't believe that is true. In the time since the Creationists made up the term Intelligent Design in hope that it might fool people into not seeing that it was just the same old weak Creationism arguments in a new package, the only people I have run across claiming those arguments are the Creationist/Intelligent Design Snake Oil Salesmen.
Perhaps you can provide us examples that support your allegation. If we assume it is a small new car, say $12,000, about 240,000 specific examples should do.
Jbr writes:
Regarding topic, I actually have posted evidence. That of course is the apc observed in all living DNA. All attempts to refute this evidence, I have rebutted so far.
Again, you may think you offered evidence but like Intelligent Design, you APC is just the nonsense of CSI repackaged in the hope that you might fool folk into thinking it was something new.
Even more importantly, no one, particularly you, has addressed the very real issue that even if there was some designer it is of no interest, use, value or importance except as some historical footnote or in cases of Product Liability suits.
Of course you also continue to imply that there is some relationship between evolution and atheism even though I've shown you numerous examples that prove that implication is false.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 534 by Just being real, posted 10-23-2010 2:03 PM Just being real has not replied

jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 549 of 648 (588345)
10-24-2010 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 486 by dennis780
10-22-2010 11:18 PM


Re: Dennis780's definition of complexity.
dennis780 writes:
But no. The hypothetical person who we are discussing mistakes the tree for being simple, and assumes natural origin, and the arrow complex, and assumes design. Why?
Actually, if you get a chance spend some time on a dig. They very often let people volunteer (mostly for the grunt work) but I can tell you that a week or so on a dig will teach you an immense amount about identifying designed from natural.
I'm not saying that you will succeed in being able to accurately tell designed from natural in just a week but maybe, just maybe by the end of the period you'll be able to get it right about half the time.
An arrow head is not just a pointed rock. And if you'll do a week or three on a dig and maybe a knapping class or three you will begin to understand just how different an arrowhead is from a pointed rock.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 486 by dennis780, posted 10-22-2010 11:18 PM dennis780 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