No, "sitting device" isn't a word. It is two words and an English phrase which is perfectly sound by grammar and logical conjunction of the definitions of the words used within it.
The zeppelin example is a little flawed. Zeppelins are not designed for people to sit in. Zeppelins are designed to transport people through the air. 100% of the zeppelin supports transporting people through the air. Each part is necessary to that purpose. Science has not demonstrated that every part of the universe is necessary to the generation of life. For example we don't see any reason that there must be brown dwarfs, in order for life to arise.
The reason I used the zeppelin example is because that is an analogy used by some design proponents (especially the ones who accept evolution). It is true that 100% of the zeppelin is dedicated for the purpose (and indeed the universe is not demonstrated to be like that) however the point was that it is a very bad design.
@t3tsuyaguy1 Is not the brown dwarf a by-product of a process that IS necessary though? Just as zeppelins cause a lot more flying creatures to deviate from their paths than would a device that transported humans in the same way as a zeppelin, but that was self-powered and only the size of the undercarriage of the zeppelin.
I don't think the Paley-inspired protestant flinging teleological arguments hold water, but you've made a very critical mistake throughout the first part of this video. Your argument assumes that it was the intention of the designer for life to flourish on the whole planet. It further doesn't take into account the wider "purpose" of life, namely that life as breath and material sustenance is but the beginning goal to which dozens of others lead which are more important and condition limiting.
A great series thus far breaking down the fine tuning design argument, can't wait for Part 3. You really have a way of breaking things down to the details and going over everything carefully that I don't see from many other youtubers.
No, "sitting device" isn't a word. It is two words and an English phrase which is perfectly sound by grammar and logical conjunction of the definitions of the words used within it.
MultiPaulinator 5 months ago
The zeppelin example is a little flawed. Zeppelins are not designed for people to sit in. Zeppelins are designed to transport people through the air. 100% of the zeppelin supports transporting people through the air. Each part is necessary to that purpose. Science has not demonstrated that every part of the universe is necessary to the generation of life. For example we don't see any reason that there must be brown dwarfs, in order for life to arise.
t3tsuyaguy1 7 months ago
@t3tsuyaguy1
The reason I used the zeppelin example is because that is an analogy used by some design proponents (especially the ones who accept evolution). It is true that 100% of the zeppelin is dedicated for the purpose (and indeed the universe is not demonstrated to be like that) however the point was that it is a very bad design.
KnownNoMore 7 months ago
@KnownNoMore Hmmm....it makes sense.
t3tsuyaguy1 7 months ago
@t3tsuyaguy1 Is not the brown dwarf a by-product of a process that IS necessary though? Just as zeppelins cause a lot more flying creatures to deviate from their paths than would a device that transported humans in the same way as a zeppelin, but that was self-powered and only the size of the undercarriage of the zeppelin.
I dunno, I think the analogy holds.
COEXISTential 6 months ago
I don't think the Paley-inspired protestant flinging teleological arguments hold water, but you've made a very critical mistake throughout the first part of this video. Your argument assumes that it was the intention of the designer for life to flourish on the whole planet. It further doesn't take into account the wider "purpose" of life, namely that life as breath and material sustenance is but the beginning goal to which dozens of others lead which are more important and condition limiting.
Theologica37 8 months ago
nice....and that last joke is really awesome :P
Blackerer 8 months ago
It's clear these videos had an intelligent designer.
Very well done. Looking forward to part 3.
xRocketNumber9x 8 months ago 4
That trash can was obviously designed to be sat on while making fart jokes.
theshredator 8 months ago
A great series thus far breaking down the fine tuning design argument, can't wait for Part 3. You really have a way of breaking things down to the details and going over everything carefully that I don't see from many other youtubers.
TitenSxull 8 months ago