Um, Why Was "If you believe in God, You're a retard" Locked?

[queenofnines]

All those experiments have done is strengthen the ID platform! You might consider the evidence viable but even scientists don't deem it viable enough to hold any weight.

   You really want to hold tight to this illusion that things were "designed".  What about a baby's soft spot?  That doesn't seem very intelligent to put there.  

What about the hell mothers-to-be have to go through during pregnancy?  For something that is supposed to be "natural" and 'beautiful", it sure has some horrendous side effects.  

What about the fact that many babies can't even FIT through their mama's pelvic bone?  

What about the skeletal system in general -- it's "designed" for bad backs and knees and crushed foot arches.

Why are our eyes backwards, with a blind spot, and we wouldn't be able to see at all if it didn't get interpreted from the brain?

Why do we have systems in the body that do a long, twisted loop instead of a direct route?  http://irreligulous.blogspot.com/2010/08/unintelligent-design-laryngeal-nerve-of.html

Why do men have nipples?  Why are some people born with extra nipples/heads/limbs/tails?  Why do we have tail bones?

Why do we have wisdom teeth?

Why are we "designed" to have to sleep for a full 1/3 of our lives??

etc., etc.

Creation was a supernatural event, but the theory of chemical evolution has no evidence so it's ridiculous to try and insinuate somebody else is wrong to believe something when the only alternative has as much evidence as the former.

Your evidence is an ancient, pre-scientific book written by superstitious goat herders who didn't know anything + this illusion of "design".  Our evidence is the most brilliant minds throughout time observing, studying, researching, analyzing, and comparing TANGIBLE proofs.

[amyrouse]

All those experiments have done is strengthen the ID platform! You might consider the evidence viable but even scientists don't deem it viable enough to hold any weight.

   You really want to hold tight to this illusion that things were "designed".  What about a baby's soft spot?  That doesn't seem very intelligent to put there.  

What about the hell mothers-to-be have to go through during pregnancy?  For something that is supposed to be "natural" and 'beautiful", it sure has some horrendous side effects.  

What about the fact that many babies can't even FIT through their mama's pelvic bone?  

What about the skeletal system in general -- it's "designed" for bad backs and knees and crushed foot arches.

Why are our eyes backwards, with a blind spot, and we wouldn't be able to see at all if it didn't get interpreted from the brain?

Why do we have systems in the body that do a long, twisted loop instead of a direct route?  http://irreligulous.blogspot.com/2010/08/unintelligent-design-laryngeal-nerve-of.html

Why do men have nipples?  Why are some people born with extra nipples/heads/limbs/tails?  Why do we have tail bones?

Why do we have wisdom teeth?

Why are we "designed" to have to sleep for a full 1/3 of our lives??

etc., etc.

I can see the reasons behind many of the things you list here.  A baby's soft spot...very specific need for it to be there...

And, although it is true that babies can't fit through mama's pelvic bone...but that is the reason why labor is so difficult...mama's pelvic bone shifts so that the baby can be delivered safely...just like baby's skull plates.  And, given time, they go back to normal.  Otherwise, if mama was 100% ready all the time for baby to come, then menses would flow out over the course of a few minutes and we'd have a rather large amount of big-a**ed women roaming the globe. 

Speaking of babies...that would be part of the reason why men have nipples and many people are born with extra extremities...if you want to believe that g-d made the design, then I can buy that...but g-d is no longer guiding that design.  Forrest Gump put it very plainly after running through a pile of dog doo...it happens.

And...I don't know about you...but sleep is effin awesome...one of my favorite parts of the day.  Took advantage of my pregnancy to sleep as much as humanly possible. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sorry...just had to jump in here, if, for nothing else, to get my sleep comment in.   

[queenofnines]

There is nothing else in this world that "appears" to be designed that wasn't actually designed. It is not delusional to think that a creative intelligence designed the universe and life in it.

See the attached pic for something that appears NOT to be designed, but you claim was.  Source: http://truth-saves.com/Unintelligent_Design.php

Videos to watch

Evolution - The 'Best' Counter Arguments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FauGMaKTCRs
Top Ten Creationist Arguments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSxgnu3Hww8
Top Ten Creationist Arguments-Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfZFsXfCy6s

[queenofnines]

[A baby's soft spot...very specific need for it to be there...

There may be a reason from a biological perspective for sure, but god can do anything, can't he?  Seems pretty stupid to put a self-destruct button on their heads.

And, although it is true that babies can't fit through mama's pelvic bone...but that is the reason why labor is so difficult...mama's pelvic bone shifts so that the baby can be delivered safely...just like baby's skull plates.  And, given time, they go back to normal.

You're forgetting that some babies are simply too big to come out of mama, or there are other complications...and before modern medical science (C-section, etc.), those women DIED.  Makes ya scratch your head if we're supposed to be fruitful and multiply.

Speaking of babies...that would be part of the reason why men have nipples and many people are born with extra extremities...

Huh?  Men can't breast feed.  Men's nipples are due to genetics; we all start off female/neutral sex in the womb.

And...I don't know about you...but sleep is effin awesome...

I like sleep, but it's an incredible waste of time if we're supposed to be "intelligently designed".  If you live until 80, you will have slept 27 years of it!!  C'mon, that's not productive.  You'd think god would have us just sleep a little bit to rest and then use the rest of the time to be spiritual warriors.

[shernajwine]

Our evidence is the most brilliant minds throughout time observing, studying, researching, analyzing, and comparing TANGIBLE proofs.

Your evidence is people doing research?  

People doing research produce evidence. Where is it?

 

What about a baby's soft spot?  That doesn't seem very intelligent to put there

brains grow rapidly and the soft spots accommodate this growth easily. If all the skull bones were fused together at birth then there would be no room for brain growth. So, the soft spots make this growth possible.
www.thelaboroflove.com

What about the hell mothers-to-be have to go through during pregnancy?

If you think about what pain is, the true necessity of pain to a human body, it is a signal to the owner of that body. An indication something needs to be done. If you put your hand too close to the stove, you will feel a painful burn telling you to move your hand.

Labor pain operates on the same principle. Certain pains can tell you to move, let you know what to do or inform you of progress in the labor. In childbirth, pain that signals you to do something is sometimes called positive pain.

Even without a specific message you can understand, many times the discomfort of childbirth leads a woman to do things that are beneficial to her baby being born. Frequent position changes, keeping the bladder empty, swaying the hips, walking and leaning forward are all common among laboring mothers and can help the baby get into a good position.
www.birthingnaturally.net

it's "designed" for bad backs and knees and crushed foot arches.

It isn't designed for that. Does everyone suffer these things? No. If that is what it is designed to do, then anyone who doesn't have these issues are the badly designed ones.

Bad design=no design
This argument assumes an infallible knowledge of the design process.

And isn't it funny that my direct question was about origins and instead of answering that question you jump to pounding the same old rhetoric about "bad design" and tell me your evidence is people doing research  
That’s right, let’s not get hung up on such trivialities as the origin of life. Wisdom teeth and back pain — that’s the slam dunk evidence for evolution!

[jcribb16]

Quote from: amyrouse on Today at 01:29:19 pm
[A baby's soft spot...very specific need for it to be there...]

Quote from: queenofnines:
There may be a reason from a biological perspective for sure, but god can do anything, can't he?  Seems pretty stupid to put a self-destruct button on their heads.

   "Fontanelles are soft spots on a baby's head which, during birth, enable the bony plates of the skull to flex, allowing the child's head to pass through the birth canal. The ossification of the bones of the skull cause the fontanelles to close over by a child's second birthday. The closures eventually form the sutures of the neurocranium."  (courtesy of Fontanelle, from Wikipedia)

[Falconer02]

Nobody has given me any facts. All anyone has tried to do is give me misinterpretation of scripture, to which I have responded.

Fact- people do not have the ability to heal other peoples ailments supernaturally just by touching them. Nobody can demonstrate this happens.
Fact- The supernatural within our society has always been faked and yet so many gullible people believe the magical prophets with the stories of omnipotent beings with obvious imperfections (I refer to a lot of religions here. Not just christianity). When you run into the realms of mythology/fiction/fantasy and make the healer character have super powers, of course that's capable of happening. The problem here is that christians regard it as fact despite it being from unreliable and rewritten sources. They believe many stories of fiction. There is your fact.

If you choose to believe your garbled version of scripture

I never really quote scripture for ya. Atleast I don't recall.

You can't tell me the universe wasn't caused by the supernatural, or you're inferring it had a natural cause without evidence...therefore implying you have faith by definition. You can't tell me it wasn't God, for a fact, because nothing has proved or disproved the existence of God 100%. You are not asserting fact to say Christianity is irrational, you are asserting an opinion.

Like I've stated many times- neither of us know. And to say you do --and that you know what this deity wants-- is completely absurd because you imply and push for something ridiculously irrational  (Yahweh is just as acceptable an answer as Harrison Ford, Cthulhu, Xenu, Zues, etc. but you do not acknowledge this). And again, the supernatural does not always mean a god character. Right now if I were to say without a doubt that it had a 100% natural cause like you claim I do, it'd be because people have always mistaken the natural for the supernatural throughout mankinds history. I refer to my caveman example.

Why would ID need to define the designer? I don't need to know WHO made my coffee pot to know it was designed. That's absurd and it's not science.

Well you're right there. ID has difficulty uncoupling itself from defined beliefs because it states the nature of the maker is unknown. But if you can't define or hypothesize anything having to do with the claim or have any legitimate evidence, you don't have anything to do with the scientific field. You just have random philosophies. And considering your christian beliefs, saying you believe in ID is a flawed statement because you believe in a defined deity. And a coffee pot as an example for the entire universe? What an brilliant example!   What's next? Watchmaker analogy?

You continued to repeat "There is evidence". What is that evidence?

Let me first say that the word "proof" around this forum tends to be thrown around a lot. And I am also not a scientist. I do not have irrefutable proof of the concept as I have stated a few times, but I do have some supportive evidence of some theories. Since I'm in a rush to go eat dinner here, let's use the thermodynamic origin idea- we have meteorites like the Murchison and scientists theorize that when the earth was forming it was bombarded by many of these types of meteors (containing aromatic hydrocarbons--http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Orion_Nebula_Gives_Clues_To_Origin_Of_Life_On_Earth_999.html ). Considering the problem with the polarized light as you pulled from G+S, yes. Not having this light within our own solar system poses a problem. But that does not mean it does not exist elsewhere in this universe-- such light can be from far off stars or nebulae. So yes- ultimately it is flawed because we have two obstacles- the not-in-the-neighborhood light problem and the time-scale problem of not being able to observe it for such humongous periods. But considering that these things actually exist, this is not nearly as bad a stretch as a defined deity like Yahweh. Again I refer you to the caveman example.

Closed minded

Granted I was super tired, maybe you should read the sentences after that line? Let me make a better example for ya though-- god is to science as what astrology is to astronomy. The difference is that science can make testable, falsifiable predictions about the origins of life. Creationists will never be able to do that.

And...I don't know about you...but sleep is effin awesome...one of my favorite parts of the day.  Took advantage of my pregnancy to sleep as much as humanly possible

lolololololol

[queenofnines]

Why is everyone lecturing me about a baby's soft spot?  lol  I know it serves a purpose, but again we're back to: so having a self-destruct button on their heads is the BEST god could do?

If you think about what pain is, the true necessity of pain to a human body, it is a signal to the owner of that body. An indication something needs to be done...Labor pain operates on the same principle.

I wasn't referring to childbirth itself, although I imagine that's no picnic as well.  It's the pregnancy PROCESS that's ironic.  Sorry if this offends all the moms on here, but the kid is basically a parasite that feeds off the body and produces side effects that make the woman sick (laundry list of effects: http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm).

Bad design=no design
This argument assumes an infallible knowledge of the design process.

Bad design=evidence that the design wasn't "intelligent"

Unless you want to try to claim god's a bad designer?  Nah, I know what you're going to say...it's that stinkin' "sin" that's got people's bodies down.

That’s right, let’s not get hung up on such trivialities as the origin of life. Wisdom teeth and back pain — that’s the slam dunk evidence for evolution!

No, but the human eye, man's vas deferens, and our DNA are (to name a few).

Falconer and I have already explained the best we could what the current knowledge on origins are.  Obviously any lay person on here is only going to give you a fraction of the available info, so if you're really interested in learning what's out there, you can certainly spend time reading accredited journals or books (read: NOT creationist sites).

I think you are just trying to corner us by asking the unanswerable questions ("how did evolution create info", etc.).  Are you REALLY interested in what science has to say?  No, I don't think so.  I think you are just trying to distract from the issue of how illogical Biblegod is by putting subject matter on the table that no one on here is qualified to answer.

[amyrouse]

Why is everyone lecturing me about a baby's soft spot?  lol  I know it serves a purpose, but again we're back to: so having a self-destruct button on their heads is the BEST god could do?

LOL...sorry, started a trend there.

If you think about what pain is, the true necessity of pain to a human body, it is a signal to the owner of that body. An indication something needs to be done...Labor pain operates on the same principle.

I wasn't referring to childbirth itself, although I imagine that's no picnic as well.  It's the pregnancy PROCESS that's ironic.  Sorry if this offends all the moms on here, but the kid is basically a parasite that feeds off the body and produces side effects that make the woman sick (laundry list of effects: http://www.thelizlibrary.org/liz/004.htm).

I tend to agree with  you there.  That is something that I quoted quite often while lobbying for reproductive rights...but that is another topic.

Bad design=no design
This argument assumes an infallible knowledge of the design process.

Bad design=evidence that the design wasn't "intelligent"

Unless you want to try to claim god's a bad designer?  Nah, I know what you're going to say...it's that stinkin' "sin" that's got people's bodies down.

I'll claim that g-d may have come up with the original design and then stepped back and said "so be it."  I honestly don't see g-d being an active participant in today's world...there is just too much that is effed up...and the assertion on the other "retard" thread that instinct is g-d's -way-of-warning-you-and-ignoring-it-makes-the-outcome-your-fault is a bunch of  .

Sin, like the devil, is a cop-out, IMO.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlWgF8dqneg

[queenofnines]

Why would ID need to define the designer? I don't need to know WHO made my coffee pot to know it was designed. That's absurd and it's not science.

All coffee pots come with a brand stamped to them, so you could call the company and find out an approximation of who the designer was.    It should also say MADE IN CHINA or something.  Don't see that on a rock!!

Speaking of rocks, since you said you could "tell" what is designed: if you compare a man-made rubber ball with a nature-made rock, the ball is actually much simpler despite being designed by an intelligence.

[shernajwine]

Like I've stated many times- neither of us know. And to say you do

I have faith. When I say "I know" I am asserting faith based on evidence of an intelligent creator. I don't deny having faith, I don't deny that there are unknowable things within the universe.

But if you can't define or hypothesize anything having to do with the claim or have any legitimate evidence, you don't have anything  to do with the scientific field.

At its best, science is an unfettered (but ethically and intellectually responsible) and progressive search for the truth about our world based on reasoned analysis of empirical observations. The very antithesis of an unfettered search for truth occurs when scientists don intellectual blinkers and assert dogmatically  that all conclusions must conform to “materialist” philosophy.  Such an approach prevents the facts from speaking for themselves.  The search for truth can only suffer when it is artificially constrained by those who would impose materialist orthodoxy by authoritarian fiat before the investigation has even begun. This approach obviously begs the question, but, sadly, it is all too common among those who would cloak their metaphysical prejudices with the authority of institutional science or the law. http://www.uncommondescent.com/faq/#notsci

such light can be from far off stars or nebulae.

Speculation, not evidence.

Let's give some more examples of what you would have to believe in denying a creator.
Neither RNA or DNA can be synthesized in the absence of enzymes. In theory and RNA replicase could exist and code for it's own replication. The first synthesized RNA replicase was four times longer than any RNA that could form spontaneously. In addition, it was able to replicate only 16 base pairs at most, so it couldn't even replicate itself.

So, I guess in order to continue to deny a creator you're going to have to apply a "science of the gaps" here.

Enzymes cannot be synthesized in the absence of RNA and ribosomes. So, "science of the gaps"

Nucleosides and amino acieds cannot form in the presence of oxygen, which is now known to be present on the earth for at least 4 billion years although life arose at least ~3.5 billion years ago.
So here, to maintain there was no creator, you will have to discard geological and chemistry data.

That natural explanation for origins becomes less reasonable with advancing scientific research. To maintain that a creative intelligence had nothing to do with it, well....it takes a great deal of non-reason

And a coffee pot as an example for the entire universe?

Do you think I'm an idiot? I do not need to look at the manufacturing company and brand name of my coffee pot, or need to observe the imprint of MADE IN CHINA, to know that it is designed by intelligence. I didn't pick up that coffee pot thinking that somehow molecules had ordered themselves together over eons of time to somehow produce what is now known as a coffee pot. Then ALL OF A SUDDEN I see Hamilton Beach on the back! Oh darn, I guess it wasn't made from random mutation acting on natural selection!  

But I guess you need that? You need to know who made your appliances and electronics, in order to know that an intelligent being designed it? Furthermore, who invented it? Who ultimately invented and came up with whole idea of a coffee pot?! I must know this in order to know for SURE that my coffee pot is not a random product of mindless natural processes. LOLOLOLOL

I'm sure you yourself are not an idiot and can comprehend a simple comparison to the reason for not needing to define a designer to know design when you see it. Cheap tactic to try and undermine my position.

Creationists will never  be able to do that.

You are confusing two different areas here. ID can do that. Are there creationists within ID study? Yes, but their own personal belief of who the designer is, is not part of the science they are conducting and asserting as theory. That is the realm of theology. Determining whether or not biological systems were intelligently designed is a legitimate scientific question.

[shernajwine]

so having a self-destruct button on their heads is the BEST god could do?

Where did God say that he created a perfect world with perfect creatures? The design of the encompassing details of childbirth is absolutely perfect and ideal to serve it's purpose. It's funny how you think you know exactly what God needs to do to perfect everything.

so if you're really interested in learning what's out there, you can certainly spend time reading accredited journals or books (read: NOT creationist sites).

LOLOLOL That's rich! Of course, this just echoes Falconers earlier statement. If I want "real" information....I shouldn't read creationist information. Yes, because you and others of your ilk have the authority on what is legitimate science! Please, get off your intelligent high horse before you get a nose bleed!  

And let me point out that you continue to insinuate that I use websites for all my information, and you have also insinuated that I "try to look intelligent". Does using information off of websites make me unintelligent? Well, if so I guess the rest you are idiots and we all are in the same club. Also, if you paid any attention to what I said previously, I DO know how to purchase, and read books. And the one I'm currently reading is by an agnostic so I guess when he says you're wrong I should not give any credence to him either??

the ball is actually much simpler despite being designed by an intelligence.

Oh, so I guess you are in agreement that inferring intelligent design is applying Occam's Razor? Great!

I think you are just trying to distract from the issue of how illogical Biblegod is by putting subject matter on the table that no one on here is qualified to answer.

How did you become knowledgeable about any other scientific subject? You are not a scientist as you say, yet you make scientific claims in your posts. How do you come across that information?

After you read this, use your mouse, use your legs, use your brain and whatever other method you use to obtain information and go find the answer to my question. Whatever information you come across to give viable and legitimate evidence for information creation by evolutionary mechanisms, you will certainly be qualified to copy and paste here in FC  

[jcribb16]

Quote from queenofnines:
Why is everyone lecturing me about a baby's soft spot?  lol  I know it serves a purpose, but again we're back to: so having a self-destruct button on their heads is the BEST god could do?
What about a baby's soft spot?  That doesn't seem very intelligent to put there.


Because you brought it up by asking about it!  It does seem intelligent to be put there, after all!!I don't question God's motive - obviously that was the best He could do for the reasons listed - [ "Fontanelles are soft spots on a baby's head which, during birth, enable the bony plates of the skull to flex, allowing the child's head to pass through the birth canal. The ossification of the bones of the skull cause the fontanelles to close over by a child's second birthday. The closures eventually form the sutures of the neurocranium."  (courtesy of Fontanelle, from Wikipedia)]

[queenofnines]

So, I guess in order to continue to deny a creator you're going to have to apply a "science of the gaps" here.

Yes, science has gaps.  And it wears that badge with honor.  RELIGION is the one that claims to have all the answers, even though when you compare the two, science is a lot more advanced and useful despite being somewhat incomplete.  You really want to settle on creation myths just because you're uncomfortable about the answers (or lack of answers) to life's tough questions?

Do you think I'm an idiot? I do not need to look at the manufacturing company and brand name of my coffee pot, or need to observe the imprint of MADE IN CHINA, to know that it is designed by intelligence.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the only reason you "know" it was designed by an intelligence is because you have EXPERIENCE with what man-made design looks like (it's something you've learned).  Just like you can automatically "know" whether a person is male or female (well, most of the time) because you have EXPERIENCE with what the visual and other cues are.

But I guess you need that? You need to know who made your appliances and electronics, in order to know that an intelligent being designed it? Furthermore, who invented it? Who ultimately invented and came up with whole idea of a coffee pot?! I must know this in order to know for SURE that my coffee pot is not a random product of mindless natural processes. LOLOLOLOL

Heh, what's with the stream of lulz?  Are you subconsciously copying Falconer's tactic because you feel threatened?  Anywho, back on topic...

Yes *I* need to know who made my appliances and electronics some of the time, for these reasons: safety, if it's a brand of good quality/value, if it's something I'll enjoy.  People do not buy nameless items as a rule, so some elusive higher power opening shop and trying to sell us his "designs" doesn't fly.  It's all about the brand, baby - you want to know what you're getting and if it will work!

Determining whether or not biological systems were intelligently designed is a legitimate scientific question.

Don't kid yourselves.  You're not leaving the intelligence open to being aliens or invisible pink unicorns... Yahweh only, folks.  It it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's CREATIONISM.

[queenofnines]

Where did God say that he created a perfect world with perfect creatures?

Yay, logical fallacies!  Something I am more qualified to answer.

If god = perfect and perfect = complete, then god wouldn't have needed to create us in the first place.

If god = perfect and perfect = without flaws, then god COULDN'T have created anything imperfect or that would quickly turn imperfect.  This obviously isn't the case...

If god = all-good and all-good = ALL good, then suffering could not exist EVER for any reason.

If god = all-knowing and all-knowing = ALL knowing, then prayer is useless and free will is a myth.  Your life is already determined, and you are just a puppet playing out your destiny.

It's funny how you think you know exactly what God needs to do to perfect everything.

Do you not think that childbirth would look this way without god?  Nature doesn't care if the woman is in pain, only if the genes get passed on.  The gruesomeness of childbirth definitely points to it being godless.  If babies were from god, I would expect the stork to deliver them or something else magical and non-invasive.    Your god sure likes to do things in the exact same way they'd be done without him...

If I want "real" information....I shouldn't read creationist information. Yes, because you and others of your ilk have the authority on what is legitimate science!

Yes, creationist information has an agenda and fantastical bias.  Real science represents reality, whether you think there's a "materialist conspiracy" or not.  Or do you think any bonehead with an air of authority is qualified to represent science?  There are rules for these things, and religious people often don't follow the rules.

Does using information off of websites make me unintelligent?

Not necessarily, it's how heavily you rely on it and from only a few biased sources that's troublesome.  You need to be looking at the opposition to be well-rounded in any field.  The opposition will tell you, "Here are the claims that believers try to make, here's why they're wrong, here are the things they say are wrong about this side, here's why they're flawed"...and then use your best judgment and be intellectually honest about which side you think is speaking the truth more, even if the side you don't want to be right (no Christian god) is.

That's the problem, though...most people never make it over to the opposition and even if they do, one of man's top flaws is that he absolutely stinks at being objective and critical of himself.  He lets his FEELINGS get the better of him rather than questioning his motives and being REASONABLE and HONEST with himself.

You are not a scientist as you say, yet you make scientific claims in your posts. How do you come across that information?

I know the basics of the basics.  Bits and pieces from science classes, books, and videos.  It's not something I've studied heavily because like I've said many times before, the Christian god can be disproven by logic alone, and logic is the most powerful weapon because it's a lot more accessible than the workings of science for most people.