18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @dj2beckerAre you going to say what you would class as evidence to support your OP? You've been asked for it several times now and seem intent on avoiding answering for some reason.
Anything that exists that exhibits characteristics of design and therefore inspires confidence in a 'creator' I would classify as evidence for creation. Look at your own body Dive and tell me honestly whether or not you think it exhibits any characteristics of design.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
Originally posted by @divegeesterEverything that exists that is not man made that exhibits design. Do you disagree that something that exhibits design is evidence for a designer? Look at your own body Dive and tell me honestly whether or not you think it exhibits any characteristics of design. Or don't you believe that God created us?
Are you going to say what you would class as evidence to support your OP? You've been asked for it several times now and seem intent on avoiding answering for some reason.
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @dj2beckerThis is a example of complexity, we can agree on that. Whether it is an example of "design", as you insist, I don’t know if it is. Your certainty about it doesn't add any weight to the significance you attribute to the complexity.
There are millions of examples of design around you, open your eyes, what do you see? Think about the millions of nerve connections that have to be connected in exactly the right sequence for you to see.
If you are really interested here is an article on the remarkable design of the human eye.
http://www.creationmoments.com/content/design-human-eye
Originally posted by @dj2beckerHow would you define something as "exhibiting" design? Because it looks pretty, complex, desirable? Do you have examples?
Everything that exists that is not man made that exhibits design. Do you disagree that something that exhibits design is evidence for a designer?
I cannot answer your second part until you adequately explain the first part.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @fmfSo you wouldn't say that something as complex as a spaceship or computer chip necessarily exhibits design?
This is a example of complexity, we can agree on that. Whether it is an example of "design", as you insist, I don’t know if it is. Your certainty about it doesn't add any weight to the significance you attribute to the complexity.
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @dj2beckerYou tried this line of argument before in a discussion I was involved in. My view on your spaceship/microchip idea hasn't changed and I agreed with those who engaged you and [I reckoned] rebutted the idea. I refer you to that. Mid to late 2016 I think.
So you wouldn't say that something as complex as a spaceship or computer chip necessarily exhibits design?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @fmfTypical FMF. Can't answer a question. 😴
You tried this line of argument before in a discussion I was involved in. My view on your spaceship/microchip idea hasn't changed and I agreed with those who engaged you and [I reckoned] rebutted the idea. I refer you to that. Mid to late 2016 I think.
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @dj2beckerAlmost. Typical FMF, deliberately treating you with disrespect.
Typical FMF. Can't answer a question. 😴
There are other people here you can try your spaceship idea out on. I am happy with how the previous discussion on the topic covered it and have no interest in adding anything.
As a debate point, it doesn't affect what I have said already on this thread. See if someone else wants to engage you on it.
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @dj2beckerThe human eye is a GREAT argument against design.
There are millions of examples of design around you, open your eyes, what do you see? Think about the millions of nerve connections that have to be connected in exactly the right sequence for you to see.
If you are really interested here is an article on the remarkable design of the human eye.
http://www.creationmoments.com/content/design-human-eye
Do some proper research and you will discover why.
Originally posted by @dj2beckerComplexity is not an attribute of design.
So you wouldn't say that something as complex as a spaceship or computer chip necessarily exhibits design?
A pencil is designed but not complex.
A snowflake is complex but not designed.
18 Sep 17
Originally posted by @wolfgang59By a person added to those statements then I would agree.
Complexity is not an attribute of design.
A pencil is designed but not complex.
A snowflake is complex but not designed.
- Joined
- 03 Jan 13
- Moves
- 13080
Originally posted by @fmfYou don't know or you don't want to commit to a viewpoint ?
This is a example of complexity, we can agree on that. Whether it is an example of "design", as you insist, I don’t know if it is. Your certainty about it doesn't add any weight to the significance you attribute to the complexity.
Maybe you just don't want to paint yourself into corner.
Maybe you wish to leave an agnostic way out of following the evidence where it might lead.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
19 Sep 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @divegeesterWould you say you are a 'creationist Christian' based solely on blind faith without a drop of 'evidence'?
By the way, for clarity on my position, I'm a creationist Christian.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
19 Sep 17
Originally posted by @wolfgang59It seems to me that this argument only works if the word “complexity” is being used in the exact same way for the snowflake as for life, but this is obviously false. There's a clear difference between a snowflake and life that leads many people to conclude that one is designed and the other isn't.
Complexity is not an attribute of design.
A pencil is designed but not complex.
A snowflake is complex but not designed.
The snowflake exhibits ordered complexity. A snowflake, or ice crystal, is a repetitive arrangement of atoms, and so it's ordered complexity. Think of coding a computer with the instructions to type A B C and D, and then repeat it over and over again. This is highly repetitive complexity. In this case, an ice crystal is just a highly repetitive geometric order, but the complexity we find in life isn't like that at all.
Proteins and DNA are sequence-specific. For example, the sequence of nucleotide bases in the DNA of every living cell is not some random or repetitive arrangement. Instead, the bases are sequence-specific to code for functional proteins, and the laws of physics and chemistry don't determine the sequence. This is called specified complexity.
See this explanation:
https://www.str.org/videos/challenge-response-snowflakes-are-complex-without-a-designer#.WcCPHRNL_zI