Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Ahh, so your debate is "I don't know what I'm trying to prove, you can't prove it not to exist"?Got yourself quite a shiny "Get out of jail free" card there, haven't you?
-AC
No, my debate is weather there exsit a "Design", If a design is proven then by following suite we can determine a designer.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Key parts: "trying to prove."Haven't succeeded, nobody has or ever will. I'm not saying there isn't or is a god, but the common debate seems to be "God exists. How can you not see it?" "Er...because there's undeniably no solid proof?" "Nah, blind."
-AC
Correct, God can not be proven. However, why does the idea of evolution have to disagree with the concept of God? The real problem is the bible. Evolution disagrees with the bible, not the concept of a God. Evolution makes not claim about God one way or the other. But this has been said before, and ignored before.
Originally posted by Blue nocturne
No, my debate is weather there exsit a "Design", If a design is proven then by following suite we can determine a designer.
Faulty logic.
Originally posted by lord xyz
true,"whether you 'agree' with intelligent design, or it just sounds ****ing crazy, DOESN'T MATTER! It's just not science."
Penn & Teller did a bullshit episode on Creationism and Intelligent design and that quote above is what Penn said.
Did you know that Gregor's Mendel's work was disregarded until the early 1900's, In a opinion is not science, only fact should be science.
And since when were Penn and teller the authority on anything?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Correct, God can not be proven. However, why does the idea of evolution have to disagree with the concept of God? The real problem is the bible. Evolution disagrees with the bible, not the concept of a God. Evolution makes not claim about God one way or the other. But this has been said before, and ignored before.
Why is the bible being brought up?
And Nothing "CANNOT" be proven, if Evo and ID were to be mereged then natural selection and mutations would become another property of the designer I.E ( Become ID).
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Faulty logic.
How so, a design advacotes a designer.
Originally posted by Blue nocturne
Why is the bible being brought up?
And Nothing "CANNOT" be proven, if Evo and ID were to be mereged then natural selection and mutations would become another property of the designer I.E ( Become ID).How so, a design advacotes a designer.
You have it backward. A design does not prove a designer. Random art would never exist if that was the case.
The Christian idea of God is the reason people (Christians) are promoting ID. Evolution says that life evolved and was not created. The bible says that God created life.
Originally posted by Blue nocturne'random mutations.'?
Evolution is natural selection and random mutations.
You say I have no idea what evolution is, I'll accept that. But do you know what ID is?
try, pseudoscience or how it's NOT scientific method k 😉
Originally posted by Alpha Centaurisee pg 12 for my "Blue Nocture in a nutshell" bit.
Ahh, so your debate is "I don't know what I'm trying to prove, you can't prove it not to exist"?Got yourself quite a shiny "Get out of jail free" card there, haven't you?
-AC
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You have it backward. A design does not prove a designer. Random art would never exist if that was the case.
Random art has no design, what's your point.
Originally posted by lord xyz
'random mutations.'?
They aren't random now,What does this say about random mutations ?
Originally posted by Blue nocturne"there exsit a "design"."? Does not compute.
No, my debate is weather there exsit a "Design",
If a design is proven then by following suite we can determine a designer.ermm, there is a design. There is a designer. The question is "What is the designer?"
Evo: The designers are the natural laws of nature, and natural science.
ID: The designer is some overlord we cannot see/hear/smell/feel/taste/sense or even know exists* created everything, and because of this, there is NO WAY anything can change, unless things in the designer's universe does it. Life and reality aren't like a Picasso painting or a video game. You do know that right?
*learn to spell.
Originally posted by Blue nocturneOh so, they 'used' to be random, and now they 'changed' into a different 'kind' of mutation? 🤨 -- that smilie means you are talking out of your ass.
Random art has no design, what's your point.They aren't random now,What does this say about random mutations ?
Originally posted by Shakyamunison👆
A crystal.The distribution of galaxies in the universe.
Originally posted by lord xyz
Oh so, they 'used' to be random, and now they 'changed' into a different 'kind' of mutation? 🤨 -- that smilie means you are talking out of your ass.👆
Did I say they were all random?
I said "RANDOM MUTATIONS" not "ALL MUTATION'S ARE RANDOM"
Get a clue.
Originally posted by lord xyz
"there exsit a "design"."? Does not compute. ermm, there is a design. There is a designer. The question is "What is the designer?"Evo: The designer[b]s
are the natural laws of nature, and natural science.[/B]
so your basically repeating what I said earlier.
Originally posted by lord xyzID: The designer is some overlord we cannot see/hear/smell/feel/taste/sense or even [b]know
exists* created everything, and because of this, there is NO WAY anything can change, unless things in the designer's universe does it. Life and reality aren't like a Picasso painting or a video game. You do know that right?[/B]
Originally posted by lord xyz*learn to spell.
😆 What a hypocrite
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
A crystal.The distribution of galaxies in the universe.
Did you read my post on common design?
Originally posted by Blue nocturne🤨
Did I say they were all random?
I said "RANDOM MUTATIONS" not "ALL MUTATION'S ARE RANDOM"
Originally posted by Blue nocturnethis means mutations went from 'random' to 'non-random', somehow. You do know that, right?
They aren't random now,
Originally posted by lord xyz^ do you understand what this is saying Blue?
Oh so, they 'used' to be random, and now they 'changed' into a different 'kind' of mutation?
Tell me, when's the part where I look stupid. Because the only stupid person here, is you.
Originally posted by lord xyzthis means mutations went from 'random' to 'non-random', somehow. You do know that, right? tell me, when's the part where [b]I
look stupid. Because the only stupid person here, is you. [/B]
Maybe since not all mutations are random 🙄 only the effect is, "ziz" I wouldn't call you stupid but I suggest you know what your talking about before you enter an argument.
Originally posted by Shakyamunisonwell, 😆 I think you know what I'd say.
Did you read my rebuttal?Am I talking to a child? 😕
Originally posted by Blue nocturneWTF are you talking about? YOU are talking from your ass. Read your posts you DUMB FÜCK.
Maybe since not all mutations are random 🙄
only the effect is, "ziz" I wouldn't call you stupid but I suggest you know what your talking about before you enter an argument.
Originally posted by Blue nocturneermm,
Clearly you didn't read my post about the golden ratio, nothing new nobody reads post really.
It helps to understand what things are.
Originally posted by Blue nocturne
Clearly you didn't read my post about the golden ratio, nothing new nobody reads post really.
I am talking to a child. 🙄
Yes I read your post and then I told you how you got it wrong. We spent a 1/2 a page talking about it. However, you didn't seem to understand me and changed the subject.