how can you think you are the chance? take a car and put everything in place but do not but a battery by chanc

Question

and than try to drive it ! answer it to me how can you believe you are the chance , the perfect chance ?

Answer 1

I have no idea what you're talking about...but I just got 2 points!

Answer 2

I am the chance? A chance, I can imagine, but THE chance?

If you are going to ask a question, at least make it sensible.

Ahh, the old argument of "if you are missing one piece, you won't work". Was that the most original thing you could think of?

God is the exact same way. The ultimate Boeing 747 (the same theroy was phrased through the medium of a boeing 747 by Fred Hoyle, which was articulated better, so I will use it as my example).

Take the common economist's motto "there is no such thing as a free lunch", and darwinism is accused of trying to get something from nothing, which seems impossible. But it is much more believable than a God that tries to get something for nothing. In a sense, God is trying to be his free lunch, and eat it too. However impossible the thing you are trying to explain by invoking a designer, nothing could be more impossible than that designer itself.

Are you saying that animals aren't born wrong? It happens all the time. Born with a genetic defect. Severe abnormalities. Mental illnesses. Ring a bell? But most of the human race doesn't have these things, which is why we have survived this long. Same as any other species.

Answer 3

Evolution is not purely a roll of the dice. It is a long slow process of random mutations and natural selection. An inorganic automobile won't qualify but - to use your analogy:

A car without a battery could be: a) a place to live, b) shelter from the weather, c) a place to store food so animals won't eat it, d) a piece of art, or e) a source of parts. As people use the car more and more they would find more and different uses for it. Eventually, someone might come up with the idea of a battery and might try hooking it up to the car and might manage to get the car to start and then might find a whole bunch of new uses for the car.

That's a loose description of how evolution really works.

A

Answer 4

I fail to see any logic in your analogy. Also, I suspect you don't really want an answer. So I won't put too much effort in. Instead I'll cut and paste this about creationism from Capella at : http://www.goatstar.org/universes-are-us/

"People of varying kinds and amounts of faith when confronted with the idea of God not existing often assert something similar to the following: “if God doesn’t exist then where did all this come from?” meaning of course that the universe is so complex that it hurts their heads so there must be someone out there twiddling the knobs.

This is actually a simplified version of an old, lengthy, and very sophisticated theological argument known as the watchmaker. It goes as follows:

“A watch requires a watchmaker.”

Translation: the watch is so complex that it hurts my head so there must be someone twiddling the knobs.

This is meant to be a general rule that doesn’t just apply to Rolexes, but to all things including universes so it follows:

“A universe requires a universe maker” which is of course: (insert your favorite god).

However, the problem with this rule is that it if it’s to be applied to other situations such as the origins of the universe, then consistency demands that it also be applied to itself (consistency is a hard taskmaster).

So, is the watchmaker himself complex? Remember the hip bone’s connected to the brain bone, or something of that effect.

If so then according to our new and edifying rule does a watchmaker require a watchmaker-maker? Did God come from a God factory? Was there a rebate involved?

The answer usually given is that the universe maker has always existed so there’s no need to lose sleep about how such a complex being came into existence.

But consistency has tossed another penalty flag. We’ve made a special rule for our universe maker that we aren’t allowed to apply to the universe itself (illegal procedure). Otherwise we could also just say that the universe has always been around so there’s no need to ponder how it came into being either (false start). There are other more important things to worry about like “tastes great vs. less filling.”

Some apologists will try to circumvent this problem by tossing God out of the universe altogether, i.e. “God is outside of the universe and therefore not subject to rules.”

However, anything that is not subject to rules also can’t have reasoning applied to it and therefore can only come from faith as an accepted premise.

The universe maker rule would then depend on this accepted premise being true. Remember, can’t have a consistent universe maker rule without an unmade universe maker can we?

Again inconsistency raises it’s ugly head because the purpose of the universe maker rule is to support the idea that the premise (the unmade universe maker exists) is true and so you end up with a circular argument which is… ummmm… invalid.

In other words it’s invalid for a rule to support a premise that the rule itself is based on.

Rule supports premise supports rule supports premise supports rule… Jane, get me off of this crazy thing…"

Answer 5

Early cars did not have a battery. They had a crank shaft in the front to start them. The battery is a convenience, not a necessity.

If I may take a stab at your cryptic question... Aren't the chances at Evolution more likely than a Deity that chooses to allow evolution?

Answer 6

I'm not sure I understand the language you write, so my answer is a guess. I'm not perfect just at the top of the food and the only animal capable of abstract thought.
Tammi Dee

Answer 7

The perfect chance for what? Understanding this question? I'm sorry, but could you add specifics?

Answer 8

You know my wiper doesn't work...