Users Online Now:
2,062
(
Who's On?
)
Visitors Today:
1,549,902
Pageviews Today:
2,252,375
Threads Today:
614
Posts Today:
12,521
06:18 PM
Directory
Adv. Search
Topics
Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject
Is there scientific evidence for an intelligent designer aka God?
User Name
Font color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Indigo
Violet
Black
Font:
Default
Verdana
Tahoma
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Anonymous Coward 10858311:MV8xOTYwMDAwXzMyODk2MjgyXzYyRUI2Nzk0] [quote:Psych:MV8xOTYwMDAwXzMyODkwMDMzX0QwRjcwNTdC] [quote:Anonymous Coward 8597527:MV8xOTYwMDAwXzMyODg4OTkyX0FBMUFFN0I3] [quote:Psych:MV8xOTYwMDAwXzMyODg4NzgyX0I5OUZGQkZD] [quote:Anonymous Coward 8597527:MV8xOTYwMDAwXzMyODg3NzI0X0YyNzBBNjE1] [quote:Psych:MV8xOTYwMDAwXzMyODg3NjM3XzczQTBBQ0Q5] And there is simply no evidence for it. There might be a God, but there is no evidence for it. [/quote] What exactly do you call a naturally inexplicable universe, life, and human consciousness? The evidence is literally right under your nose, but you're viewing the world through the NATURALIST FAITH, and you don't even realize it. You're not skeptical, you're faithful. [/quote] I am skeptical towards the supernatural explanation due to a lack of evidence. Science studies the laws of nature. You are proposing that there is something outside of the bounds of these laws which we can't measure but created these natural laws. Laws, which by the way, you reject. i.e. evolution. Everything that you view as evidence of God is based on natural laws. [/quote] Exactly, you have a rigid faith in natural laws (or naturalism) as the ultimate explanation for everything. The logical problem of where these natural laws originated, is not fathomable to you. You've closed your mind off to such questions because asking them violates your faith. Micro-Evolution is an observable fact. It is a pure assumption that "millions of years" removes the barriers that we observe daily. Macro-Evolution is not even a working theory. Nobody rejects Natural Laws of which its effects can be measured or observed. And Macro-Evolution is certainly not one of these. Natural origin is based on total Faith, and remains irrational and inexplicable according to the natural laws of Science itself. [/quote] Sticking to facts does not equal having faith. I can easily imagine a God creating natural laws. It does not require any effort at all as it is the most simplistic explanation ever. Unfortunately, I have thoughts and questions. The problem is that you can not differentiate speculation and fact. You are speculating that there is a supernatural being which created these natural laws but there is nothing to substantiate that idea. Evolution does not need to be split in micro or macro. It is the same process. Macro explains the branching and micro explains the changes within a branch. Micro leads to macro. Evolution is a fact, deal with it. A number of years ago, creationists rejected the big bang. Now they claim God sparked the big bang. This will happen with evolution as well. [/quote] Questions the Big Bang Does Not Answer A major challenge to the big bang has come from observers using the corrected optics of the Hubble Space Telescope to measure distances to other galaxies. The new data is giving the theorists fits! Astronomer Wendy Freedman and others recently used the Hubble Space Telescope to measure the distance to a galaxy in the constellation of Virgo, and her measurement suggests that the universe is expanding faster, and therefore is younger, than previously thought. In fact, it "implies a cosmic age as little as eight billion years," reported Scientific American magazine just last June. While eight billion years sounds like a very long time, it is only about half the currently estimated age of the universe. This creates a special problem, since, as the report goes on to note, "other data indicate that certain stars are at least 14 billion years old." If Freedman's numbers hold up, those elderly stars would turn out to be older than the big bang itself! Still another problem for the big bang has come from steadily mounting evidence of "bubbles" in the universe that are 100 million light-years in size, with galaxies on the outside and voids inside. Margaret Geller, John Huchra, and others at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics have found what they call a great wall of galaxies some 500 million light-years in length across the northern sky. Another group of astronomers, who became known as the Seven Samurai, have found evidence of a different cosmic conglomeration, which they call the Great Attractor, located near the southern constellations of Hydra and Centaurus. Astronomers Marc Postman and Tod Lauer believe something even bigger must lie beyond the constellation Orion, causing hundreds of galaxies, including ours, to stream in that direction like rafts on a sort of "river in space." All this structure is baffling. Cosmologists say the blast from the big bang was extremely smooth and uniform, according to the background radiation it allegedly left behind. How could such a smooth start have led to such massive and complex structures? "The latest crop of walls and attractors intensifies the mystery of how so much structure could have formed within the 15-billion-year age of the universe," admits Scientific American—a problem that only gets worse as Freedman and others roll back the estimated age of the cosmos still more. [/quote]
Original Message
I think intelligent design is more plausible than not. What says you?
Pictures (click to insert)
General
Politics
Bananas
People
Potentially Offensive
Emotions
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Textual
Doom
Misc Small Smilies
Religion
Love
Random
View All Categories
|
Next Page >>