Don´t remain tied, Darwin has lied

You dont feel embarrassed for me and your not really looking for evidence.
In fact.. you know for certain you just saw far more evidence than you can even begin working through.
You also know Im not embarrassed and I dont look like a fool.

You ARE replying 'as if' this is what is happening because its what you 'need' to say.

Its called a 'Geckopelli Post'.

:O

 

Shall we have a poll?

 

wow, brocktoon, you only hear (or read, i guess) whatr you want to hear. I didn't say i felt embarrassed for you, i said I could if it wasn't so humorous. Nor did I say that were embarrassed.

And I already worked through your evidence, and it is lacking. What it is lacking is the reason why our most rational conculsion about the existance of the moon should be that someone put it there. All you did is list some facts about the moons size, it's rate of ascent out into space, and some different theories (and nothing about your's) regarding the creation of the moon.

 

Brocktoon does not really exist. Sure something posts. But it is not what you would call a human. Brocktoon is merely a computer program. He does not exist as an individual human being.

 

But sir, since it is receding at a measurable rate, confirmed by many who have looked into it, your 'best solution', is hogwash.

I already posted my favorite theory, and it is backed up by computer simulations that replicated the event once the original input was fed into it.

You defy all who you disagree with, facts be damned.

 

That part about the computer simulation was hilarious!

The Moon is part of a working, complex and ordered system which orders and benefits to the rest of the system.

Whenever we find such things [in which we know the cause] we get the same answer over and over - Intelligent Design.

 

The state of the art military computer system and program is hilarious to you.
It is quite amazing to me. They use it to show what damage various sizes of bombs would cause, and what different speeds, impact angles, and targets would cause to result.
The moon is as you say, I feel, it shields us from many big rocks that otherwise would've smacked us good.
I get the same answer all the time too........I don't know, it is beyond my grasp as yet. If I decide one day I am certain, I'll let you know, till then I am just making conclusions on what my research suggests to me.
Facts are rare as a stellars sea cow, yet claimed facts are like water.

 

Terrible logic

You can't use human examples of intelligent design as significant evidence of intelligent design having it's hand in the creation of the universe. We can't know that just because we have man-made examples of intelligent design that everything with working order was made by intelligent design. Specifically since the vast majority of things in the universe not created by man, and we don't know for a fact how they were created, we can't just assume they were created by intelligent design just because our working creations are. The fact that the world seems to have some order doesn't necessarily call for intellligent design, it could be other things, such as we had the paticular ingredients to form the type of life we now have here on earth.

So what you are basically doing is similar to someone taking a survey of 10 people whom all hate chocolate (this taking place of man made working examples of intelligent design), then speaking for millions saying "the world doesn't like chocolate" (ie, the rest of the entire universe, minus man-made working creations) I don't know if you can understand the analogy, but there it is for ya, maybe you can understand why I can't accept your "intelligent design" theory with what little evidence you have for it.

Your "intelligent design" thery comes from too small a focus group (well focus group isn't the right words, but it was the only one I can think of, you all should know what I mean)

 

how about the battle of Verdun in WWI? a chaotic bloodbath that was senseless and totally tragic, costing thousands of lives for nothing.

That is very hard to call ordered, and helpful of the system, yet it must be included as part of God's creation, yes?
Or how about the various extinct animals, mankind is directly to blame for, is that a good thing, not to me.
the civil war in Rwanda also comes to mind,

Will someone tell me if these events are, as brocktoon says the moon is,
"part of a working, complex and ordered system which orders and benefits to the rest of the system."

 

The way zooplankton can convert sunlight via photosynthesis is a very impressive complex procedure, yet I see no reason that it had to be made by God. Maybe it was, I just don't see the 'smoking gun'

 

Thank you Sera Michele!

For once again pointing out that just because something has a lot of 'something' - that does not 'therefore' prove that everything has a lot of 'Something'.

What would we do without your amazing logical deductions Sera!?!

 

That is your very incomprehensible (to me) interpretation of her post.
I concluded that she said nothing of the sort.
to each his own
live and let live
we can all be right.

 

Sera doesnt realise that Scientific investigation is limited by the observable and retestable world around us.

We have no choice but to find what we find and compare to whats available.

We can only accept that we observe highly complex working order inside a human cell.
We honestly do not know what caused this complex working order to exist.
Our best and only option is to find other examples of working complexity where we CAN observe the Cause.
[Dont bother protesting.. this is all that we have]

So we observe a Beaver Dam. It seems to have some basic working complexity and order.
The Cause - over and over again its intelligent designers.
We observe a Ford F250 Crew Cab ... It has a working complexity.
We know the cause is intelligent Design.

This is NOT a case of SELECTING MAN MADE Inventions!
Get that through your head FINALLY.

Your analogy should go this way.

You find a giant Chocolate in the woods one day.
You honestly can not know where or how it came to be.

So the best you can do is find other chocolates with an observable cause.
You go to the Hershey factory and observe thousands of Chocolates and their Cause? Intelligent Design.
You find more chocolates in your Kitchen... and you observe that your Mom is always the Cause. (Intelligent Design again!)

So.. based on SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION you conclude that 'Most LIkely' Scientific explanation is that the Chocolate you found in the woods was CREATED BY AN INTELLIGENT DESIGNER (aka a Chocolate maker)

Sera .. does this PROVE that your mystery chocolate was made by a designer?
No.
Are you silly because you ONLY TOOK EXAMPLES OF MAN MADE CHOCOLATE and that is 'Unfair'?
No.
You found ANY AND ALL EXAMPLES OF CHOCOLATES WHERE YOU COULD OBSERVE THE CAUSE.

Why do I have a creepy feeling that you are going to reply with some information about Chocolate being 'different' from DNA.
Why?
Why?

 

I have found Sera's views more grounded in empirical science than Brocktoon's by a wide margin.

I would not conclude that the complex, efficient systems that we call life must be created, based on their exquisite inner workings and outer beauty.
Fractals are a definite factor.
I would expect that after billions of years, only the most efficient would be left.

It is a futile discussion, though, since the concept that all this amazing stuff must be divinely made is a conclusion that is impossible to prove either way, so debating it won't definitively answer it, in my view.

 

Check out my new Sig!

Thanks BlackG.. now THAT was funny!

 

very good, excellent even, bordering on genius.

 

I will give you a screen credit.
But..
Isnt that from a Beatles 'Sgt Peppers' Song?

 

what, a screen credit? I don't know all the words, but your qualifications should be enough for me to just accept you are right.

Isn't it Sargeant Pompous' Fancy Pants Club Band...

that sounds more familiar to me.

Darwin was so cool, sailing the seas on the beagle, and studying certain related species to determine why they differed.....pure genius, yes?

 

There would be a few of his contemporaries who would strongly disagree with your admirations hehe.
In fact, some would say he stole the idea.

and as far as I know.. he did not 'set out' to do anything.

I think he imagined the story while they were in the Galipagos... not something he planned on.

 

Not another one........sheesh, I am still getting over the revelation that Bell stole the telephone idea.

Does no one do their own work?

Next I'll find out that those fine TV Evangelists are not sincere.....