What about the evidence of design in all of creation? It is obvious that anything that is designed has to have an intelligent creator. For example, a computer never came about by mere accident, but had to have been thought out and planned by an intelligent designer. It is the same with creation, and more so, as the natural world is far more complicated than anything humanity can create.
2007-05-24 02:30:06 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
It is called the golden ratio, the Pyramids were built to these same mathematics...
Love and Light.. BB.. )O(
2007-05-24 03:04:26 · answer #1 · answered by Bunge 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
it is probably an expression of the underlying mathematical laws of the universe. it does not indicate that the universe was designed. a 'magic' designer would not have to rely on mathematical formulae, as the designer is 'magic' and not bound by natural law. the fact that nature uses this formula means there is a beneficial utility in it. it is like icthyasaurs and dolphins having the same body plan even though they are not ancestral to each other. the body plan best suited the environment in which they existed so they evolved similarities and it is the same with the 'golden ratio'.
>bang< behe's bacterial motor bites the dust. and did so some time ago.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB200_1.html
2007-05-24 02:46:56 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The golden ratio occurs regularly in nature because it's simply an ideal engineering constant in the structures it occurs in.
In the nautilus, it presents an ideal structural growth pattern. In leafy plants, the golden ratio ensures maximum direct illumination by the sun on its leaves.
The regular occurance of a given constant is not proof of design. Does the fact every circle has a circumference 3.1415926535897... times its diameter imply design, or is it a feature simply intrinsic to the definition of a circle?
Further, show me two computers that mate together and produce an offspring computer that is not exactly like one or the other, and you can use the invention vs. creation comparison. Until then, no dice there either.
2007-05-24 02:35:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
I am an artist, so I am familiar with the Golden Section. There is nothing magic about it, and it does not prove anything about gods. Pi, e, phi, etc. do not either. There is a big difference between a computer and the natural world. The usual argument involves a watch, but substituting a computer does not make your rant original or logical. Who designed your designer. Was he always here? The universe could just as well be always here. Try thinking for yourself, rather than repeating nonsense such creationists as Morris and Gish concocted. Scientists have refuted everything these men said.
2007-05-24 02:41:43 · answer #4 · answered by miyuki & kyojin 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
So does the Creator have this ratio? And where's the Creator that designed the Creator? Did THAT Creator have this ratio? If there is no Creator for the Creator, then it looks like some things, even very complex things, did not need a Creator.
So I'm not sure how you can continue to assert that all very complex things need a Creator.
2007-05-24 02:36:40 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think you mean 1.6180339887 aka phi, the golden ratio.
This is simply a number that represents the evolution of the most efficient way to - for instance - stack petals on a flower to get the most into the smallest space.
It is obviously also a number that represents natural selection, seeing as the best arrangement of petals recieves the most sunlight.
On the other hand, a created universe would have a lot more diversity, and the golden ratio would not be anywhere near as frequently seen.
The golden ratio supports evolution and denies intelligent design.
2007-05-24 02:36:15 · answer #6 · answered by Dharma Nature 7 · 5⤊ 2⤋
The atheists that answered (God bless 'em) only said, "Who designed your God" but did not address your question.
Also if you look at the bacteria flagellum under a electron microscope you can see a motor. Yes, I said a MOTOR! A design apparatus! This bacteria when studied has made a number of scientist reject evolution.
A DVD you may want to order is called, "Unlocking the mysteries of life" Very scientific and very very interesting.
short preview: http://www.illustramedia.com/umolpreview.htm
2007-05-24 02:49:21 · answer #7 · answered by Jeanmarie 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Fill a glass of water, right to the edge. Look at the filled glass.
Was that exact amount of water designed to fit exactly in that glass? Or did you just stop the water when the glass was full?
Now look at our planet. Was it designed for us to live on? Or did we just inhabit those parts of the planet that suitable for us to live in? Large parts of this planet are not for humans. Deserts, jungles, oceans. face it. this planet is NOT designed for us. Live began to exist where it was possible.
Download Google Earth and take a little trip around the world. You'll be amazed to see the large parts of this planet that simple weren't 'designed' for anybody.
2007-05-24 02:40:28 · answer #8 · answered by ? 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Shaddup
2016-05-21 11:04:38 · answer #9 · answered by lettie 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So then who created the creator? and think of this is a designer had to have existed to create something so complex as nature then the designer as a result would have to be complex and had to have had a creator
2007-05-24 02:34:12 · answer #10 · answered by John C 6 · 4⤊ 4⤋