Can We Detect Design in Nature?

Explaining how we can detect design in nature, and how supposed lizard evolution (new gut structure) is not really evolution.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• intelligent
• design
• detecting
• ID
• atheist
• lizard
• evolution

[potsocket]

this video friggin owns!

good job dude! keep it up!

how can you still be atheist after watching this?!?!

[onceforgivennowfree]

@potsocket

Umm....irreducible complexity & the fine tuning of the laws and constants of our universe would be 2 other popular ones!

[gregrutz]

Common design = common designer

Different design = different designer

[Hufflewaffle]

If we can detect design in nature How do you explain all the stuff that ISN'T designed?

[sfg911]

@Answerquestions1 Sorry, life is nothing like anything "designed" that we have ever seen. You just WANT it to seem like that. Put your design theory to the test and it fails every time.

Take a close look at how life is "built", how all the building blocks are self assembling, how life can ONLY build on what it had before.... then you can conclude life started on it's own without knowing the details about exactly how... even though we already have most of them.

Your designer is a bad designer

[Answerquestions1]

@sfg911

God is not limited to natural laws, that is the whole idea of a God, the whole point of the inteligent design model is that there are things (like the origin of life) that can not be explained with natural laws.

the point is that life has all the characteristics that something design most have, answering who the designer is and where did he come from is a different topic. One can conclude that something was designed without knowing the details of the designer

[sfg911]

@Answerquestions1 Oh, and there is one other problem I feel needs to be mentioned. If something seems designed to you, proves that it WAS designed (because all complicated things we see were designed by intelligence) well then, all intelligence that we know of had to learn. The idea that intelligence just poofs into existence without having to learn first is far more a problem than complex organisms arising on their own over time without a designer. We have evidence supporting the later.....

[sfg911]

@Answerquestions1 Eternity isn't necessary. We have plenty of evidence to support this and you posses not one scrap of evidence or logical argument supporting the possibility of any form being eternal OR that an eternal form could effect known reality. But if it is, well then I proclaim Ju-Ju rays are eternal and they carry intelligent code that was absorbed by the earliest replicating chemicals. There you have it... irrefutable proof of intelligent ju-ju rays!

[Answerquestions1]

@sfg911

yes, you are correct, at some point something was not created (something has always existed), this is true for both atheists and theists. But since it is imposible for something to be eternal (according to natural laws) then the only thing that can be eternar is something that is not limited by natural laws, like God, or any other supernatural thing.

[sfg911]

@Answerquestions1 Nowhere did I say something cannot have created something else or that we need to know what created any specific object.

Claiming a complicated thing requires a creator is an endless fallacy and applies just as well to your creator. At some point, some thing wasn't created. Life is not proof of a creator UNLESS your creator is also proof of a creator creator... and a creator for that.... and that..... to infinity. The logical starting point is for what we have evidence for.