Liquidrage

"Eternal" does not change the odds of something existing. Can you explain to me how having the property "eternal" makes something less or more likely to exist? What evidence is there for the designer being eternal? What you believe is of no importance as you are attempting to use facts to present your case.

Lets ignore the fact that the Big Bang does not in any way shape or form prove a non-eternal universe. And don't attempt to twist words. Even with accepting the Big Bang, even without using a Big Crunch, there are still valid theories put forth by some of the best minds of modern physics that lead to an eternal universe.

Back to the topic.
What are the odds for an eternal being just being? How are they less then a universe just being? How does the presence of a designer lessen the odds? How did the hydrogen in my body overcome the odds you are so against that do not change regardless of the selection process (designed or not designed)?

You say you have problems with the odds against humanity existing without the purposefull act of a designer. To overcome these odds you put forth the presence of a eternal designer capable of producing that which you find so overwhelming.
Yet you can't even begin to address the processes that would lead to the existance of this eternal designer.

You should care. It is your article and you presented it. I believe it has holes and if you continue to so casually brush off these holes and fail to address these then you have no business posting such articles in the first place. If my rebuttles are so naive you should have no problem addressing them. I've attempted to be civil and did not dismiss your work with simply a witty retort. I would appreciate the same in return.

[ October 14, 2002: Message edited by: Liquidrage ]</p>

Ted Hoffman

Vinnie: Intensity, I do not feel compelled to respond to Liquidrage as I see nothing but a non-sequitor.

Intensity: If you could only demonstrate that its a non-sequitur!

Vinnie : We are positing a mind behind the creation. The whole premise is that the probablitiy of life forming in any universe "randomly" is ridiculous.

Intensity: It did not form randomly. It formed gradually over billions of years.

Vinnie : If you posit a mind behind the creation with a purpose then all this fine-tuning makes sense in that light.

Intensity: But there is no evidence that there is ANY mind behind it. You have simply made an arbitrary claim based on personal incredulity and anthropic observations.
Why did the designer create one huge galaxy among millions of others only to make life possible in one planet in one galaxy. How do you explain away the waste. What about earthquakes and extreme weather patterns - do they indicate that the earth was designed for supporting life? And deserts? Are they meant to support life?

Vinnie : Otherwise we simply say we got wickedly lucky. I don't even know what is being argued by Liquidrage's response. It makes no sense to me.

Intensity: There is nothing lucky about a coherent sentence coming out from a number of keyboards that are being punched senselessly by monkeys. It's all a matter of probability.

Vinnie : Had you had a clue you would also know that despite the popular appeal of "the big crunch", the universe looks like it wil expand forever and die a cold death.

Intensity: Actually, the expanding universe is the one that led to the big bang theory and the big bang theory to black holes.

What would make the Universe expand forever? And why is the universe expanding?

Vinnie : Scientists now think the expansion rate of the universe is accelerating

Intensity: That does not mean it will expand forever. Maybe the dark matter is increasing and other galaxies are forming and pulling the universe apart. They could also start undergoing gravitational collapse.

Vinnie : No big crunch and no "magic bounce mechanism" producing an infinite reincarnating universe either.

Intensity: Strawman arguments. Reincarnating Universe?

Vinnie : First one was a non sequitor and I'll read Drange's paper later.

Intensity: I can't expect much cogent argumentation from someone who labels every argument non sequitor[sic] without demonstrating if he understand what non sequitur means, or even how it is spelt.

I will end this by saying that there is INSURMOUNTABLE evidence that the universe began from a chaotic state from which order arose as the heavier elements formed and the forces between them also formed. Life on earth started forming after the poisonus elements had reduced and an atmosphere had formed from the gases that came out of the molten rocks. Then from simple organisms, they evolved OVER billions of years in a chaotic environment to complex life forms.

If God could come to exist without a designer, so can we.
If God is alive yet he does not require eartly conditions, so can other beings, thus there is nothing lucky about our being alive here.