quote:
Welcome on board:
message 257
message 259
message 265
mark24, crashfrog, wounded king, MisterOpis1.... (hopefully I have mentioned anybody, if not, excuse me)
who's next?
yxifix,
I'm not really interested in what others had to say about this. I am interested in what you are arguing, and the current logical fallacy you are running into here.
I told you that I'm willing to negate the possibility of random chance creating the first proteins of life. By doing so I am willing to be "on your side" for a moment, so to speak. I am willing to submit that we just don't have enough information about the origins of life to feel comfortable with the idea of random processes creating the first proteins.
Okay?
Now, in order for me to feel comfortable with what you are arguing, an Intelligent Designer starting the process, I would very much appreciate some positive, verifiable, and observable evidence that there was, indeed, an Intelligent Designer responsible for it all.
You cannot explain to me the reason is because it's just too unlikely for a random event to happen, because I'm willing to forego the argument from ignorance fallacy this is creating and agree with you here for the moment.
You cannot therefore conclude that since it a random event is too unlikely the only viable solution is therefore an Intelligent Designer, because this creates the argument from false dilemna fallacy. There are other possibilities of the event occurring, ranging anywhere from a meteor carrying the life's proteins (and perhaps even life's beginning cells), to a martian from another planet dropping off a couple of beginning cells and RNA proteins.
So in order for me to be convinced that an Intelligent Designer of some sort, began life's process, I need to have some positive, verifiable, and observable evidence that this ID was responsible.
Do you have this positive evidence that clearly demonstrates this?