Refractor

Yes, everything is made of matter. That is just a red herring that has no bearing on the issue at hand. Even if I meaninglessly concede that intelligent designers only "rearrange" matter, the fact remains that we only see intelligent designers rearranging matter into complex systems, but have never seen mindless natural processes rearrange matter into complex systems.


Matter was created at some point in the past, there can be no doubt about that. If matter always existed, we would observe it in an immutable state of equilibrium. Matter does not exist in any such state of equilibrium, therefore, it most likely is not eternal but began to exist at some point in the past. The observed law of entropy further supports this notion.

Refractor

A discussion on the merits of TOE is a whole other can of worms that need not be opened at this time. I will say that as a general rule, all creation processes entail an evolution process of the product.

If you go to a car manufacturing factory, you'll see how a vehicle "evolves" out of thousands of "simpler" parts scattered all over a factory. If you watch the construction of a skyscraper, you'll see how a gigantic structure "evolves" from an architect's "simple" drawing.

The point is, evolution is not the antithesis of Creation. In fact, evolution is an inherent attribute of all things that are intelligently created. You'd be hard-pressed to find a single intelligently-designed product that was not created through some form of progressive, evolutionary process. So if I claim that all lifeforms were intelligently created, I should expect to see evidence of a progressive, evolutionary creation process. Likewise, if you go into a building and start ripping out the walls, you'll also see all kinds of evidence for how the structure evolved from steel framing, insulations, piping, etc. But that evidence of an evolutionary creation process does not mean there were no intelligent designers involved in the construction. Likewise, we have no reason to believe that an intelligent designer was not involved with the contruction of all lifeforms.

Mageth

Refractor:

As such, we have no reason to believe that an intelligent designer was involved with the contruction of all lifeforms.

Well, I agree with that sentiment wholeheartedly!

Ah, I see you caught your mistake. But that's my position. We have no reason to believe that an intelligent designer is required in the construction of any lifeform. "A appears designed, and indeed was designed. B appears designed, and, since A was designed, B also must have been designed" is an obviously fallacious argument. Natural processes (self-organizing principles, emergent phenomenon, evolutionary principles, etc.) are sufficient to account for the complexity we see.

Hawkingfan

The law of entropy only applies to matter after the big bang. It does not apply to the matter before it. Our observations of matter have absolutely nothing to do with the way it was prior to the big bang.

Hawkingfan

Obviously, you know nothing about diabetes. BECAUSE of inefficiency, I cannot eat whenever I want, breathe properly (if I go low), DIGEST (without receiving insulin which my body is UNABLE to provide), think (if I have a reaction), see (I am at extremely high risk of going blind or developing proliferative retinopathy), reproduce, walk (many diabetics are amputees), at times I cannot move, speak, type, etc...

Philosoft

Ho there. You were talking about quantum fluctuations, not all "mindless natural processes." Right now, you're beggin the question, so you'd probably better tell us exactly what "mindless natural processes" you're talking about, because you'll certainly be unsuccessful defending the premise, "No 'mindless natural process' has ever created a complex arrangement of matter."
What in the Nine Hells is an "immutable state of equilibrium" and what does the 2LoT have to do with it?

Refractor

LOL! Damn you are fast. I do type fast (70 wpm) so I usually have to proofread a couple times to get rid of mistakes like that.


I disagree with your position for numerous technical and theoretical reasons, but this is not the proper thread to get into a T.o.E. debate, right?

Refractor

First off, I am sorry to hear about the health problems you are suffering with. My arguments are separate from my personal sentiments.

However, your problem does not represent a deficiency of design. It represents a mechanistic malfunction. For example, some very good car manufacturers occasional make cars that have a mechanical malfunction, like a bad alternator, bad shocks, transmission, etc. That doesn't mean that all alternators, shocks, and transmissions are "inefficient" designs. It simply means that there was production errors when those particular items were made.

The same thing is true with humans. Occasionally, some people are born with systems that have mechanistic malfunction. But mechanistic malfunction and "bad design" are two different things. A thing can have an inherently good design, but have a production error which causes it to malfunction.

Mageth

Occasionally, some people are born with systems that have mechanistic malfunction. But mechanistic malfunction and "bad design" are two different things. A thing can have good design, but have a production error which causes it to malfunction.

I would assume that the designer designed the production system as well. If this production system does not work particularly efficiently (a high percentage of fetuses are naturally aborted due to "production errors", and many if not all of the rest who make it to birth have at least one "production error", not to mention the fact that many men and women have "production system" flaws that prevent or make it difficult for them to reproduce), isn't that a sign that the production system itself has flaws in its design?

Refractor

You have to go by my actual argument, not your rephrasal of my argument. I never said that "no mindless natural process has ever created a complex arrangement of matter". A snowflake can be considered a "complex arrangement of matter" and obviously natural processes cause snowflakes. That's not my argument.

My argument is this ----> No mindless natural process has ever created a complex system.


Hold on buddy.....just why do you say there are NINE hells instead of, say, four or five??? Hmmmm??

"Immutable" means - unchanging......"state" means - condition of being......and "equilibrium" means - balance. So translated, "immutable state of equilibrium" means - an unchanging condition of balance. If matter is eternal, it would exist in an unchanging condition of balance. I hope that clarifies things for you.