View Single Post
Old 02-09-2013, 17:52   #490
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 6,006
Blog Entries: 1
Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
It's only a fallacy if it's false. Given the possibility of natural phenomena creating very complex structures, where minor defects are incompatible with life, and an intelligence creating it, both are rather hard to believe. Recognizing the extrapolations and assumptions made on both sides of the issue, whether philosophers and logicians agree or not, it seems logical to withhold judgement until such time as enough evidence is present to decide. I also recognize that on both sides there is bias. Some Theists really want to believe they can prove life was designed and created. Some Atheists really want to prove that it was not created and just a natural phenomena.
You continue to stick with what is possible. Any of the myths listed below are possible. That's why what is taught in a science class should be based on what the evidence supports.

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
Your example of an Unintelligent Designer is an example a lack of perfection is not a lack of inteligence. Just figuring out how difficult it is to make a cell work is very complex, figuring out how to make it replicate, differentiate within a mamal, the positive and negative feedback loops between relatively distant tissues within the body to handle small details that without which, it all stops working. I think you are trying to rule out a perfect design, and assuming a perfect designer must make a perfect design, and that you would understand the big picture much better. First, I make no assumptions about the characteristics of a possible designer, not even sure there is one let alone what the characteristics would be. The human body is very complex, homeostasis is a constant and active activity, it's very easy for one defect to stop it all from working pretty quick. To assume if there was a designer that the design isn't good enough is comical. After all, if there were a designer, the design has lasts millipns of years and led to you being able to complain about it. What would happen if animals did not grow up, grow old and die naturally, I see problems with that. We all get to die at least once. It is what it is. BTW: wouldn't arguing that it could not have been designed because the design is uninteligent also be an argument from incredulity?
I'm not arguing that life was not designed, merely pointing out that an Intelligent Designer (in the Christian I.D. sense) can be pretty well ruled out. Like you, I accept that a pretty dumb designer could be responsible for the current state of things. If somebody would care to present the evidence to make that case, I'd be glad to review it.

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc View Post
It is what it is. It was probably either made or just a result of natural phenomena. Both possibilities are incredible. Was life made? Some say yes, some say no, I say maybe.

Can I ask if you've noticed how much information I have proposed putting in front of a science class?
Yes, more than the (lack of) evidence warrants.
  • Judeo-Christian: man from dirt, woman from his rib
  • Scientology: involves Lord Xenu, DC8-like spaceships, frozen aliens, volcanoes and hydrogen bombs
  • Japanese: elements appear in the form of an egg, and Izanami gives birth to the gods
  • Greek: Nyx, the bird, lays an egg that hatches into Eros, then the shell becomes Gaia and Uranus
  • Iroquois: Sky Woman fell from a floating island (actually pregnant and pushed by her husband) and gave birth to the world
  • Hindu (one version): Brahma created primal waters which grew into a golden egg which was split into heaven and earth
  • Chinook: great egg laid by the Thunderbird
  • African Bushmen: people and animals lived in harmony, then Great Master and Lord of All Life, Kaang, planted a tree that spread over it and dug a hole to bring up the people and animals
Keeping in mind that the Judeo-Christian explanation has no more evidence to support it than Scientology or any of the other stories, do all of these, and all other explanations, deserve mention in a science class?

As said before, if somebody wants to teach them in their home, in a Bible study class, in a private school science class, or even a public school mythology class I have no problem with that. If they want something taught (or even mentioned as an alternative explanation) in a public school science class, then they should have the evidence to back up the claims.

ETA: I'm not interested in proving there was no designer/creator, as I believe it would largely be a waste of time. As I've said numerous times, even if chemists could create life in the laboratory at will, that would not prove that there was not a designer/creator. At most it would demonstrate that one was not necessary.


Last edited by ArtificialGrape; 02-09-2013 at 17:55..
ArtificialGrape is offline