Disciple

QUOTE---Believe away, old chap. But would you find it rude if I asked you for evidence to support your contention?

REPLY---Do you believe in love? Show me the evidence? What about Anger? Do you dream? Do I? Where is the evidence? Where is the evidence
for a broken heart? Are there any? Do you have concrete proof that you can mail to me immediately that your father is your biological father. Do you accept things on belief, yes or no? How do you decide when this is okay and when it is not? Everything is most definitely black and white.

QUOTE---Don’t know what you mean. Is what ‘merely’ a result of evolution? Bach and Hendrix, Shakespeare and Stephen King, Einstein and Eisenstein? Nope, that’s culture. Which is underpinned by, but not dependent on, our biological nature, a nature that comes from being a bipedal primate with an overblown, evolved brain.

REPLY---Are we the result of an evolutionary process which is devoid at the start, in the middle and toward the end, of a divine creator? Oh and as for the over-evolved brain bit....why has evolution landed us with the ability to enjoy classical music, art and literature? In what way does our enjoyment of these things lend itself to survival of the species?

QUOTE---Aha. “Fluke.” Nope. There’s rather little that’s fluke-y about evolution. Go dip into that vast literature. For now, I’ll simply point out that evolution is not a theory of chance.

REPLY---Evolution may not be a fluke itself. The process of evolution is itself part of a wider law of things, however, if evolution has no external purpose whatsoever, the results of evolution literally are just flukes. Oh, and I have dipped into that "vast" literature.

QUOTE---And the ancestors in question were something like 3,500,000,000 -- it could easily be 10,000,000,000 -- generations ago.

REPLY---So you do accept that your ancestors were as I suggested?

QUOTE---Oh, and no swamp. No plants at the time, you see.

REPLY---I see. Condescension at its very best....well done! =p

QUOTE---Perhaps you’d like to ask yourself why, if hearts are more than muscles, they are the same ‘design’ in all mammals, whether whale, bat or human. Why does a hedgehog have a liver, two kidneys, two lungs, a spleen, limbs formed of a single bone with two bones at the further end, eyes with a retina that has the light cells facing away from the light, an ear with little bones in it that start off, in the embryo, as part of the jaw... and so on and on and on... just as in you yourself.

REPLY---This one is easy. We are all from the same designer. An expert can tell an artists work just by the way they finished a pianting or the particular way they saw and drew shapes. we can see god's handiwork all around and his designs are similar...

QUOTE---This is the old Argument from Personal Incredulity. It is a fallacy because one’s own lack of knowledge or acceptance has no bearing on the reality of the situation. If I do not believe that the earth is a ball -- even though it being so is, in many ways, counterintuitive -- this does not mean that it is actually flat.

REPLY---Thanks for pointing the obvious out. I am well aware of the vast number of fallacies which abound and which we are ALL guilty of at some point. I too can search a list of fallacies and suggest which ones you are expounding at any one time. Again, well done. However, I am sharing my personal viewpoints and hoping to get yours back, not necessarily to be told that my lack of understanding proves or disproves something. That I am already well aware of.

Disciple

Ah, what fantastic sarcasm!

Oolon Colluphid

Disciple, just one more question....

Can you think of any reason, other than evolution, why birds, which do not have teeth, and which have a tiny splint-like fibula (leg bone) and ankle bones that are all one lump, possess genes for making teeth and a complete fibula with separate tarsals?

These genes are not normally switched on, but with a bit of experimental manipulation they can be.

See:
Hampé experiment
and
Hen’s Teeth

Note that according to evolution, the ancestors of birds did have these features.

Why have genes that don’t work for something you don’t have?

TTFN, Oolon

simian

Ah, I see, so mammals and reptiles have different designers - their hearts have different numbers of chambers - of course, both are pulling for earlier designs - perhaps intelligent designers also reproduce and die.

And, of course, the designer of the squid eye and the mammalian eye were different designers - the squid ID seemed to be much better at the wiring process. You would think the mammal designer could go back and copy the squid design - but perhaps the community of intellegent designers have some sort of copyright infringement laws. (don't blame me, I am just trying to make sense of the reason a later design is worse than an earlier one)

And, yes, I do think the heart is nothing more than a specialized muscle - and I think that will be proven even to all but the most ardent creationist (ID or otherwise) when a long-term mechanical heart is designed by humans.

Simian

braces_for_impact

A common designer might explain the great amount of design flaws in the various species about the planet. They all have one inept designer see, so it all makes sense!

No wait...

Arken

I hereby dub this 'The Sissy Theory of Creationism'

Disciple

Design flaws? Such as?

Mecha_Dude

Let's see: Tail bones? appendixes? The delivery of babies prematurely by most mammalian standards just to get the thing through the birth canal, leaving it practically helpless? Men's nipple? Running the male urethra through the prostate, which can expand preventing urination? There are plenty of design flaws everywhere in nature, and those are just a few of the human ones.

Calzaer

Oh! Oh! My turn!

Sweat glands that inefficiently filter out minerals, so we lose salt and potassium (and other things).

Egtopic pregnancies; nothing to do with genetics or "The Fall(tm)", just something that randomly happens and kills people.

It's estimated that some 20% of women have birth canals too small for average-sized babies; that's why C-sections are so popular and one reason why death in childbirth was so common in the past.

Our eyes actually see everything upside-down, and require extensive extra brain wiring to flip it back.

The self-destruct mechanism in skin cells that prevent them from absorbing too much UV radiation is very inefficient; otherwise, we'd peel BEFORE getting sunburnt.

Testicles on the outside of our bodies. Temperature regulation requires a huge investment of musculature and blood flow. Interior testicles would be much more efficient and protected to boot (no pun intended).

"Boxer's fracture"; the bones in our most effective natural weapon are so fragile that using them regularly almost assures that they'll break.

Allergies. Need I say more?

Ok, someone else's turn!


See, the problem is, Evolution allows for mistakes. If it's not a significant selection factor, it'll hang around forever. An omnipotent, all-known designer, however, should make his creations perfect, especially when they're allegedly in His Image.

Peez

Oolon, I am very happy for you.


Peez