|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,765 Year: 4,022/9,624 Month: 893/974 Week: 220/286 Day: 27/109 Hour: 0/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What IS evidence of design? (CLOSING STATEMENTS ONLY) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
If we cannot identify something as designed then we must say sorry, there is no evidence that it is designed. What level of certainty would you say is required before you could say something is designed?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
What level of certainty would you say is required before you could say something is designed? That level of certainty depends on the evidence. So what is the evidence?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
havoc writes: If we cannot identify something as designed then we must say sorry, there is no evidence that it is designed. What level of certainty would you say is required before you could say something is designed? I would need a very high level of confidence, near 100%. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
We can also observe designers making arrowheads, and we can even find ancient sites where the arrowheads were made complete with arrowheads that didn't make the cut and the flakes of flint left over from the process. We also observe that arrowheads do not reproduce, so they can't make themselves. Not so with life. Taq: What if you found a rock that looked just like an arrow head but lacked the other forensic evidence that you point out. No tooling marks no other arrow heads around. My point is that I don’t think we need to know exactly how a thing was made to know that it was made. We don’t have to know its maker (although it makes it nicer) to know it has one. Edited by havoc, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
That level of certainty depends on the evidence. So what is the evidence? Why? The evidence should lead to your level of certaity. I mean if you could quantify it would you be happy to say some thing was designed if you were mostly certain. At some point the odds of something happening randomly are so small they should be discounted. So if you are observing something that is not random and is not ordered by natural law then odds are it is designed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
What if you found a rock that looked just like an arrow head but lacked the other forensic evidence that you point out. No tooling marks no other arrow heads around. My point is that I don’t think we need to know exactly how a thing was made to know that it was made. We don’t have to know its maker (although it makes it nicer) to know it has one.
Without the tool marks it would not look like an arrowhead. Also, arrowheads do not reproduce all on their own and evolve. Life does.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10073 Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
The evidence should lead to your level of certaity. Right. So what is the evidence?
At some point the odds of something happening randomly are so small they should be discounted. So if you are observing something that is not random and is not ordered by natural law then odds are it is designed. So how do you tell the difference between something ordered by natural law and something that is designed? With evolution we have a natural law that produces non-random DNA sequences. So how do we differentiate between non-random evolution and design?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
havoc writes: At some point the odds of something happening randomly are so small they should be discounted. So if you are observing something that is not random and is not ordered by natural law then odds are it is designed. Why? Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Without the tool marks it would not look like an arrowhead. Also, arrowheads do not reproduce all on their own and evolve. Life does. Certainly there must be examples of arrow heads where the tooling marks have been eroded by water or wind and sand. But since all known Arrow heads have been designed and have a creator I would say it is likely designed and likely has a creator. Evidence of design: Life does not occur by chance. There is no known natural law that causes non living matter to become living matter. So there is very little chance that life and the genetic code are not designed. So at this level of certainty I am quite comfortable in saying that life was designed. Same goes for the unmarked arrow head.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Right. So what is the evidence? Why do I have to give you this evidence? Are you saying there is no evidence for design? My point is no evidence is 100% so at what point do you make the leap to say it is designed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
havoc writes: Without the tool marks it would not look like an arrowhead. Also, arrowheads do not reproduce all on their own and evolve. Life does. Certainly there must be examples of arrow heads where the tooling marks have been eroded by water or wind and sand. If the evidence is not there then we cannot say it is an arrowhead. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
havoc writes: Right. So what is the evidence? Why do I have to give you this evidence? Are you saying there is no evidence for design? My point is no evidence is 100% so at what point do you make the leap to say it is designed. There is no evidence of Biological Design. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
Why? I think that covers most options.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
havoc Member (Idle past 4780 days) Posts: 89 Joined: |
There is no evidence of Biological Design. So Im assuming that you think that there is evidence for non biological design. Can you objectively observe a non biological thing and make a determination as to whether it is designed or not? Does this same evidence apply to biology? If not why not? Do you accept the same evidence in one case but not in the other? I think the evolutionist thought goes like this. Life is not designed so there is no evidence of design in life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
havoc writes: Why? I think that covers most options. That does not answer the question. Why should we discount something based only on fictitious and unsupported odds? Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024