runningman1 Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 yes it does very much so except it was a serpent and nothing like a snake I am starting to think you are a troll. You can't mean any of the stuff you have said on this thread. Well played Sir, well played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teeny Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I am starting to think you are a troll. You can't mean any of the stuff you have said on this thread. Well played Sir, well played. I believe a serpent is slightly different but never the less that's how the fall began. I am most human and don't look like a troll ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwhine Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I believe a serpent is slightly different but never the less that's how the fall began. I am most human and don't look like a troll ! What do trolls look like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quik Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 What do trolls look like? Like serpents, but less talkative and they sell doom pears rather than doom apples.* *at a guess, who knows what these people believe! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apelike Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Like serpents, but less talkative and they sell doom pears rather than doom apples.* *at a guess, who knows what these people believe! I think you are missing the point. Its not about what people believe but understanding why they believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lottiecass Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 I believe a serpent is slightly different but never the less that's how the fall began. I am most human and don't look like a troll ! I was being sarcastic teeny,no need for the sermon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 You dont understand how this works do you. I've given you my viewpoint. You have to refute my assertion - and you don't get to do that by asking questions. I've made the case that the items in question are not the best design they could be. As such I need do no more. Either you can refute the assertion, or my argument that intelligent design is complete rubbish stands. Erm.. no. YOU made a point that the current human system is not designed good enough- so show us HOW it should be. Prove it. It is you who doesn't understand rather than me. Let's even take the 'blind spot' of the eye you raised. Here even more then in the case of the vas deferens, I question the possibility of a design without it. The blind spot is very intrinsic to the mechanism of the eye, and is an effect created by a very vital part of the eye. Designing an eye without a blind spot is thus very challenging. Furthermore, the blind spot of each eye is compensated by the second eye. So the "flaw" in design isn't really problematic if you look at the totality: a set of eyes. No I'm comparing one fairytale with another. It doesnt matter how you dress them up, they are still fairytales that make extraordinary claims and can therefore be dismissed without evidence to prove them. Its no good just saying the usual 'fairytales'- I particularly don't even follow in the line of quoting 'holy' books etc. In fact, rationality and logic itself will point towards an intelligent designer. All out founding fathers of science (ones some of you on here think are gods) believed in God. Their reasons to study the cosmos/astronomy etc all led from their belief in what they perceived was an intelligent force- these include Galileo and Kepler (astonomy), Pascal/Boyle (Chemistry), Newton (Calculus), Farraday, Linnaeus, Lister - the founding father of the scientific method, Ibn Al Haytham, and many more including Einstein. They all believed in an ordered universe and the possibility of HOW it functioned. SO it is no no fairytale my friend. Actually, come to think of it, how can you even TRUST your mind- after all according to your world view of atheism, you are nothing but 'matter', blind random particles, an accidental by product-how do you know what you say is true? How can you attach any ulitmate meaning or truth to your thoughts. I will leave you with that one. I'm taking a sabbatical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Erm.. no. YOU made a point that the current human system is not designed good enough- so show us HOW it should be. Prove it. It is you who doesn't understand rather than me. Let's even take the 'blind spot' of the eye you raised. Here even more then in the case of the vas deferens, I question the possibility of a design without it. Actually I think he was making the point that the human system is not designed at all. The blind spot is very intrinsic to the mechanism of the eye, and is an effect created by a very vital part of the eye. Designing an eye without a blind spot is thus very challenging. Furthermore, the blind spot of each eye is compensated by the second eye. So the "flaw" in design isn't really problematic if you look at the totality: a set of eyes. Poor God, he must have struggled (what with his omnipotence and such). Its no good just saying the usual 'fairytales'- I particularly don't even follow in the line of quoting 'holy' books etc. In fact, rationality and logic itself will point towards an intelligent designer. All out founding fathers of science (ones some of you on here think are gods) believed in God. Their reasons to study the cosmos/astronomy etc all led from their belief in what they perceived was an intelligent force- these include Galileo and Kepler (astonomy), Pascal/Boyle (Chemistry), Newton (Calculus), Farraday, Linnaeus, Lister - the founding father of the scientific method, Ibn Al Haytham, and many more including Einstein. They all believed in an ordered universe and the possibility of HOW it functioned. SO it is no no fairytale my friend. Actually, come to think of it, how can you even TRUST your mind- after all according to your world view of atheism, you are nothing but 'matter', blind random particles, an accidental by product-how do you know what you say is true? How can you attach any ulitmate meaning or truth to your thoughts. I will leave you with that one. I'm taking a sabbatical. I think you have a great misunderstanding of what logic and rationality actually mean. Furthermore, you're making a huge leap between an ordered universe and a super being having designed it all. It may be rational to see order in nature but that huge leap you have to make from there to arrive at the conclusion of a 'creator' is the gap in the "God of gaps" phrase. ---------- Post added 06-01-2016 at 10:11 ---------- yes it does very much so except it was a serpent and nothing like a snake I believe a serpent is slightly different but never the less that's how the fall began. I am most human and don't look like a troll ! So which one is it, slightly different or nothing like? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatrajah Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Isn't the word "serpent" just an archaic word for "snake"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 Isn't the word "serpent" just an archaic word for "snake"? Apparently a serpent is nothing like a snake but it's also slightly different to a snake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts