I feel like it must be a 14 year old girl on the other end who just got out of Sunday School and is hoping her father lets her go get ice cream with the 15 year old boy.
2006-06-16 05:31:42 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I think that the claim that complexity requires design is a clear example of a non sequitur logical fallacy,.
2006-06-16 05:37:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
how can you're saying we are not irreducibly complicated when we do not even understand what unsleeping is or what we are precisely. are you able to coach or disprove to me that we are not residing an entire phantasm? existence, or unsleeping, although we prefer to call it or conceive it as, is as complicated as our thoughts can dictate. when we take a seem at our genes, and what we anticipate of all of us understand, we nevertheless will be lacking some thing. Our genes would no longer be irreducibly complicated, yet we do include some unique a million~4% that are surprising. Out of this international, unthinkable genes, genes which could administration the growing older procedure, and far better. i'm no longer attempting to coach irreducibly complexity or disprove it, yet i visit claim that our unique set of genes will be some type of link linked with a author. There also will be some issues that we are able to no longer bodily see or understand. also, what you imagine is undesirable would no longer be truth. what's reliable or incorrect is continuously opinionated, hitler idea what he did replaced into truth, replaced into proper. Our society has made a acceptance and regularly occurring understand-how of "reliable" behaviour because "reliable" acts have effective consequences on our body, biologically.
2016-10-14 05:32:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are a monster! I would not allow my 14 year old girl to go out on dates! YOu are some kind of sicko! Read your Bible!
Okay, I'm tired of that. There's every kind of person in the world. And that's just depressing sometimes. Rock on!
2006-06-16 06:35:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I find it lazy to be honest. Just because they can't think of a credible answer they jump to conclusions. Laziness, and definitely not science, I think faith when I read that line.
And of course, the old problem, if we agree a complex being needs a creator, then so does it's creator.
2006-06-16 05:38:00 · answer #4 · answered by Xenu.net 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I see someone parrotting an argument which they have not thought through sufficiently to see the glaring flaw which it contains - i.e. it requires an infinite regression of designers, which is a logical impossibility.
2006-06-16 05:39:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Firstly, "Who designed the designer??" Secondly, if there had been an almighty designer, why do anomilies like appendices which are useless in humans but needed in herbivores exist?
2006-06-16 05:37:08 · answer #6 · answered by SLH 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I always pity the person living in a house with one book and the creepy religious art.
2006-06-16 05:35:30 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Like...it's probably, like....you know?...the...like...generation he or she like.... grew up in...you know what I mean...like the whole designer, generation type thing...right?
2006-06-17 12:39:55 · answer #8 · answered by ikwya 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That the god-of-the-gaps thing. If science can't explain it, then god did it.
2006-06-16 05:37:04 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
idiots learned to type.
2006-06-16 05:35:29 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋