Why has a bee's sting evolved to be barbed?

Originally posted by daniel58
http://prophecyrevealed.com/godvsscience.htm

http://www.everystudent.com/features/isthere.html?gclid=CLiPhsef75wCFRRlswodykRakA

http://www.allaboutcreation.org/proof-of-god.htm

http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm

http://www.philosopher.org.uk/god.htm

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/aquinas3.html

http://www.freemarketprojec ...[text shortened]... of the Eternal Almighty One, because, if there...

There is no proof, but if we walk in front of a mirror that's proof?
Which is it?
You started making some sense in talking about faith as the support for people who believe in god, only to throw it all away by referring to the bible and my mirror as the proof.
You can't have it both ways.
Which is it?

Originally posted by amannion
How is the existence of the universe evidence of a god's existence? Where's the logical link between one and the other?

The logical link is this.

If there were no God the universe would not exist. Therefore, the universe exists because God created it.

If God did not create the universe, then how do you think the universe came into existence?

Explain how you think the universe has always existed, or how anything that exists has always existed.

I am sincerely seriously interested to know what you think.

Originally posted by amannion
The fact that everything seems just right for life shouldn't be all that surprising. If the things that make life possible weren't around then life wouldn't exist.

What's the problem with this being an accident? Why must you religious types have some sort of forced order imposed on the universe and everything in it from outside?
What is such a problem a ...[text shortened]... in gods and fairies doesn't mean beauty and wonder are closed off from me. Far from it ...

"If the things that make life possible weren't around then life wouldn't exist."

How did those "things" come about?

Chance maybe?

I will admit that it is possible to imagine that those "things" could have come about by chance. The problem for me is accepting this view without taking a step back further and asking were did it all begin?

I hope you can admit that it is also possible that there was nothing in existence once before space, matter, and time.

Originally posted by josephw
The logical link is this.

If there were no God the universe would not exist. Therefore, the universe exists because God created it.

If God did not create the universe, then how do you think the universe came into existence?

Explain how you think the universe has always existed, or how anything that exists has always existed.

I am sincerely seriously interested to know what you think.

If there were no god the universe would not exist.
How is this statement of yours logical. It's juts a belief of yours, not a logical argument.

I can't explain the origin of the universe, but I believe there is a natural explanation for it - one that doesn't resort to the supernatural.

But why is the existence of an infinite universe - or an infinite anything - less believable than gods and fairies?

Originally posted by josephw
[b]"If the things that make life possible weren't around then life wouldn't exist."

How did those "things" come about?

Chance maybe?

I will admit that it is possible to imagine that those "things" could have come about by chance. The problem for me is accepting this view without taking a step back further and asking were did it all begin?

I h ...[text shortened]... s also possible that there was nothing in existence once before space, matter, and time.[/b]

Yes, I can admit there may have been nothing in existence - which sorts of presents you god-believers with a problem doesn't it?

Let's just be clear, evolution by natural selection is not a 'chance' process.
As for the origin of life, maybe that was chance, maybe not. I certainly can't see anything ruling it out. Simply saying, I can't believe that it could happen this way, therefore it didn't is not very useful as an argument.

Originally posted by amannion
If there were no god the universe would not exist.
How is this statement of yours logical. It's juts a belief of yours, not a logical argument.

I can't explain the origin of the universe, but I believe there is a natural explanation for it - one that doesn't resort to the supernatural.

But why is the existence of an infinite universe - or an infinite anything - less believable than gods and fairies?

I wish I didn't have to go now. I want to reply to this post. It may be a day or a week, but I'll get back to this. I hope you'll be around.

Originally posted by josephw
I wish I didn't have to go now. I want to reply to this post. It may be a day or a week, but I'll get back to this. I hope you'll be around.

I'll be around ...

Originally posted by amannion
I don't think it's a piece of cake, but evolution gives it a way to work in much simpler and easier increments than simply going from inorganic elements to a complex living thing.

It is a believed path, it does not mean it actually occured that way.
I also disagree with views about it being easier in very small
increments, I actually think it is impossible under those conditions to
get to where we see life today from inorganic elements, I'm more
inclined to believe small changes occur in complex living creatures,
but getting to that state of complex living creatures requires design.
Kelly

Originally posted by amannion
Evolution by natural selection is not about improvement, and it certainly doesn't work retrospectively if that's what you're alluding to.

Okay, you don't think life improved through that process??
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
It is a believed path, it does not mean it actually occured that way.
I also disagree with views about it being easier in very small
increments, I actually think it is impossible under those conditions to
get to where we see life today from inorganic elements, I'm more
inclined to believe small changes occur in complex living creatures,
but getting to that state of complex living creatures requires design.
Kelly

The problem with your argument is that it doesn't take into account the time scale. If you believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old then of course you're right. That's not enough time for evolution to create the complex organisms that exist today.

However, if you believe as almost every scientist believes that the earth is about 4.54 billion years old and the first organisms are over 3 billion years old then you're talking a different ballgame.

So I think the argument really starts with how old the earth is.

Originally posted by KellyJay
It is a believed path, it does not mean it actually occured that way.
I also disagree with views about it being easier in very small
increments, I actually think it is impossible under those conditions to
get to where we see life today from inorganic elements, I'm more
inclined to believe small changes occur in complex living creatures,
but getting to that state of complex living creatures requires design.
Kelly

This notion of 'requiring' design is an assumption that is just not founded on anything other than your belief that it couldn't happen any other way.

I'll give you an analogy.
It's often said that the possibility of the existence of extraterrestrial life is quite high. Why? Well, because there's so much space out there; the chances that we're on our own would be really small wouldn't they?
Well, we may be living in a universe surrounded by many other intelligent civilisations but wishing it were true does not make it true. We may also live in a universe where the conditions that enabled life to form, and the processes that led to this formation occurred only once - us.
The belief in ET often devolves to a hope that it can't be any other way.

Your notion of life requiring design strikes me in a similar way. 'I actually think it impossible' you say, but why do you think this? What's your reasoning behind such a statement, other than that believing so fits with your pre-existing view?

Originally posted by KellyJay
Okay, you don't think life improved through that process??
Kelly

What does that even mean?
Life evolves to suit the environments it exists in. Does that mean improving? I guess, but if the environment changes than those evolved 'improvements' are not going to help any longer.

The large dinosoaurs evolved in a high oxygen environment. They had adaptations specific to the environmental conditions. They were 'improved' I suppose in comparison to other organisms.
But this improvement became a hindrance when conditions changed.

Improvement suggests some sort of direction in evolution. But evolution isn't directed towards anything in particular, just whatever can be built onto from existing features to help suit environmental conditions.

Originally posted by amannion
This notion of 'requiring' design is an assumption that is just not founded on anything other than your belief that it couldn't happen any other way.

I'll give you an analogy.
It's often said that the possibility of the existence of extraterrestrial life is quite high. Why? Well, because there's so much space out there; the chances that we're on our own ...[text shortened]... ind such a statement, other than that believing so fits with your pre-existing view?

No different than you believing otherwise.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
No different than you believing otherwise.
Kelly

Well there's a bit of a difference in the methodology don't you think?
Scientific explanations are falsifiable, peer reviewed, empirical, reasoned, amongst other traits.
Perhaps you could call a religious explanation peer reviewed, but belief in the supernatural pretty much rules out all other scientific traits. So there's a difference.

Originally posted by amannion
This notion of 'requiring' design is an assumption that is just not founded on anything other than your belief that it couldn't happen any other way.

I'll give you an analogy.
It's often said that the possibility of the existence of extraterrestrial life is quite high. Why? Well, because there's so much space out there; the chances that we're on our own ...[text shortened]... ind such a statement, other than that believing so fits with your pre-existing view?

"Your notion of life requiring design strikes me in a similar way. 'I actually think it impossible' you say, but why do you think this? What's your reasoning behind such a statement, other than that believing so fits with your pre-existing view?"

Having been around a few designed items seeing the effort required
for the proper material, in the proper quantities, being used in the
proper environment after everything is designed to do specific things
leads me to think many who believe in evolution really don't look at
all the pit falls in what they are claiming occurs. Why would there
be bones, why would bones take the consistency and shapes they do,
why would there be nerves, why would and why would various
consistent patterns appear with completely different types of creatures?
Eye sight has never in my opinion ever been satisfactory explained
to me either with how or why that ever occurred.
Kelly