Albert Einstein: Up Close and Personal!

[GISMYS]

Sorry. Your gods never wrote any letters. You're free to write your own personal version of Christianity (many Christians do), but don't pretend that your version is anything but Christianity lite

WHAT PROOF do you have for your wild opinions?? SEEK TO KNOW GOD ALMIGHTY AND LIVE!!! WHY DIE IN SIN??

You need to believe that everything I write comes from the almighty, all powerful.

Believe and it shall be true.



AND YOU??????

NO PROOF!!! HUH??? JUST BLINDED IGNORANCE!!! YOU TRY TO REJECT GOD BECAUSE YOU LOVE YOUR PET SINS AND HOPE YOU CAN AVOID FINAL JUDGMENT!!! DREAM ON!!! deaam on.

 

[DriftingSand]

You presented no argument requiring me to do so.

As you are the one claiming something is true, ie: creator gawds, demons, talking snakes, etc., at least via a YouTube video, it falls to you to provide proof of your claim. The standard of "prove it isn't" is not a standard at all. A claim is just an assertion until it is proven. A "fact" has to be substantiated.

So lets see your facts substantiating your gawds and the creators of your gawds and their creator gawds, etc.

Let's see the facts demonstrating genesis and talking snakes.

Yeah, I'm fully expecting you will fail to support a single item noted above but here's your chance to demonstrate you're not just another religious clone. Present your facts.

My grandma wrote a letter to me about 45 years ago. She told me what was happening in her life. I believed her because I no reason to doubt her. However, I wasn't there so I wasn't an eyewitness to her claims. You, too have received letters from members of your family telling you what's going on in their lives. You believe them because they have never lied to you but you weren't there so you believe them on faith.

God wrote a letter (via His chosen vessels) and He's never lied to you or me before so we have no reason to believe He's lying now.

False equivalence!

Your grandma actually existed but there is zero evidence that your God does.

How do you know my grandma existed?

 

[DriftingSand]

You presented no argument requiring me to do so.

As you are the one claiming something is true, ie: creator gawds, demons, talking snakes, etc., at least via a YouTube video, it falls to you to provide proof of your claim. The standard of "prove it isn't" is not a standard at all. A claim is just an assertion until it is proven. A "fact" has to be substantiated.

So lets see your facts substantiating your gawds and the creators of your gawds and their creator gawds, etc.

Let's see the facts demonstrating genesis and talking snakes.

Yeah, I'm fully expecting you will fail to support a single item noted above but here's your chance to demonstrate you're not just another religious clone. Present your facts.

My grandma wrote a letter to me about 45 years ago. She told me what was happening in her life. I believed her because I no reason to doubt her. However, I wasn't there so I wasn't an eyewitness to her claims. You, too have received letters from members of your family telling you what's going on in their lives. You believe them because they have never lied to you but you weren't there so you believe them on faith.

God wrote a letter (via His chosen vessels) and He's never lied to you or me before so we have no reason to believe He's lying now.

Sorry. Your gods never wrote any letters. You're free to write your own personal version of Christianity (many Christians do), but don't pretend that your version is anything but Christianity lite

Thanks for your flimsy opinion. And thank God for your very existence.

 

[Hollie]

My grandma wrote a letter to me about 45 years ago. She told me what was happening in her life. I believed her because I no reason to doubt her. However, I wasn't there so I wasn't an eyewitness to her claims. You, too have received letters from members of your family telling you what's going on in their lives. You believe them because they have never lied to you but you weren't there so you believe them on faith.

God wrote a letter (via His chosen vessels) and He's never lied to you or me before so we have no reason to believe He's lying now.

Sorry. Your gods never wrote any letters. You're free to write your own personal version of Christianity (many Christians do), but don't pretend that your version is anything but Christianity lite

Thanks for your flimsy opinion. And thank God for your very existence.

Why do you constantly behave like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior?

It was you who made some absurd attempt at analogy surrounding letter writing. None of the many men who wrote any the various bibles made claims to hearing voices from the gods or suggested they were directed by a missive of supernatural origin. You're adding elements to your religion which never existed because you have a desperate need to make the religion something it is not.

As I noted previously, you're just a mere pedestrian fundamentalist who makes up his religious belief as he goes.

 

[GISMYS]

Sorry. Your gods never wrote any letters. You're free to write your own personal version of Christianity (many Christians do), but don't pretend that your version is anything but Christianity lite

Thanks for your flimsy opinion. And thank God for your very existence.

Why do you constantly behave like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior?

It was you who made some absurd attempt at analogy surrounding letter writing. None of the many men who wrote any the various bibles made claims to hearing voices from the gods or suggested they were directed by a missive of supernatural origin. You're adding elements to your religion which never existed because you have a desperate need to make the religion something it is not.

As I noted previously, you're just a mere pedestrian fundamentalist who makes up his religious belief as he goes.

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 TIMOTHY 3:16-17

 

[GISMYS]

Thanks for your flimsy opinion. And thank God for your very existence.

Why do you constantly behave like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior?

It was you who made some absurd attempt at analogy surrounding letter writing. None of the many men who wrote any the various bibles made claims to hearing voices from the gods or suggested they were directed by a missive of supernatural origin. You're adding elements to your religion which never existed because you have a desperate need to make the religion something it is not.

As I noted previously, you're just a mere pedestrian fundamentalist who makes up his religious belief as he goes.

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 TIMOTHY 3:16-17

For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. GALATIONS 1:11-12=====No prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. 2 PETER 1:21

 

[DriftingSand]

Sorry. Your gods never wrote any letters. You're free to write your own personal version of Christianity (many Christians do), but don't pretend that your version is anything but Christianity lite

Thanks for your flimsy opinion. And thank God for your very existence.

Why do you constantly behave like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior?

It was you who made some absurd attempt at analogy surrounding letter writing. None of the many men who wrote any the various bibles made claims to hearing voices from the gods or suggested they were directed by a missive of supernatural origin. You're adding elements to your religion which never existed because you have a desperate need to make the religion something it is not.

As I noted previously, you're just a mere pedestrian fundamentalist who makes up his religious belief as he goes.

I apologize that you weren't able to grasp the simplicity of the analogy. Since I don't believe that my Creator was "nothing" I'm forced to conclude that my Creator was "Someone" (since chaos doesn't create order and since order requires intelligence). Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the Bible is a letter from an intelligent Creator to His creation.

 

[Hollie]

Thanks for your flimsy opinion. And thank God for your very existence.

Why do you constantly behave like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior?

It was you who made some absurd attempt at analogy surrounding letter writing. None of the many men who wrote any the various bibles made claims to hearing voices from the gods or suggested they were directed by a missive of supernatural origin. You're adding elements to your religion which never existed because you have a desperate need to make the religion something it is not.

As I noted previously, you're just a mere pedestrian fundamentalist who makes up his religious belief as he goes.

I apologize that you weren't able to grasp the simplicity of the analogy. Since I don't believe that my Creator was "nothing" I'm forced to conclude that my Creator was "Someone" (since chaos doesn't create order and since order requires intelligence). Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the Bible is a letter from an intelligent Creator to His creation.

Your attempt at analogy was simple-minded. The bibles were written by various men at various times with no direction or dictation by your gods.

Similarly, there is nothing that precludes order deriving from chaos and there is nothing that requires order to derive from intelligence.

Unfortunately, nothing you offered is either meaningful or true. It's simply your display of ignorance regarding both science and the human based origins of your religion.

 

[Derideo_Te]

My grandma wrote a letter to me about 45 years ago. She told me what was happening in her life. I believed her because I no reason to doubt her. However, I wasn't there so I wasn't an eyewitness to her claims. You, too have received letters from members of your family telling you what's going on in their lives. You believe them because they have never lied to you but you weren't there so you believe them on faith.

God wrote a letter (via His chosen vessels) and He's never lied to you or me before so we have no reason to believe He's lying now.

False equivalence!

Your grandma actually existed but there is zero evidence that your God does.

How do you know my grandma existed?

Because you didn't just magically come into being from the dust of this earth. Like everyone else you had two parents and 4 grandparents, at least genetically, so that is how I know your grandma(s) existed.

 

[DriftingSand]

Why do you constantly behave like a child who has been scolded for bad behavior?

It was you who made some absurd attempt at analogy surrounding letter writing. None of the many men who wrote any the various bibles made claims to hearing voices from the gods or suggested they were directed by a missive of supernatural origin. You're adding elements to your religion which never existed because you have a desperate need to make the religion something it is not.

As I noted previously, you're just a mere pedestrian fundamentalist who makes up his religious belief as he goes.

I apologize that you weren't able to grasp the simplicity of the analogy. Since I don't believe that my Creator was "nothing" I'm forced to conclude that my Creator was "Someone" (since chaos doesn't create order and since order requires intelligence). Therefore, the logical conclusion is that the Bible is a letter from an intelligent Creator to His creation.

Your attempt at analogy was simple-minded. The bibles were written by various men at various times with no direction or dictation by your gods.

Similarly, there is nothing that precludes order deriving from chaos and there is nothing that requires order to derive from intelligence.

Unfortunately, nothing you offered is either meaningful or true. It's simply your display of ignorance regarding both science and the human based origins of your religion.

I've tried to keep it simple for your sake but you still can't grasp the truth. Not too sure I can make it any MORE simple for you but I will try:

1) Chaos no make order.
2) Order require thought ... plan.
3) Thought/plan = fruits of mind.

There. I tried to make the sentences short and the words small. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help.

 

[DriftingSand]

False equivalence!

Your grandma actually existed but there is zero evidence that your God does.

How do you know my grandma existed?

Because you didn't just magically come into being from the dust of this earth. Like everyone else you had two parents and 4 grandparents, at least genetically, so that is how I know your grandma(s) existed.

So you use basic logic to assume (correctly) that I have two grandmothers. Very good.

I use the exact same logic when coming to a belief in an intelligent Designer. Since chaos and chance cannot create order then we must conclude that the "ordered" universe came to be by something other than chaos and chance. When we put something in order we use a thought process and build a plan. We then execute that plan and put something in order. For instance, if I want to build a model car I don't just throw it in the air and expect it to fall to the ground all assembled. I have to make it happen by using a thought process, a plan, and a certain amount of intelligence.

The universe, the living cell, the eyeball, etc., are all examples of complex, ordered "models" that didn't not just come to exist by chance.

 

[Derideo_Te]

How do you know my grandma existed?

Because you didn't just magically come into being from the dust of this earth. Like everyone else you had two parents and 4 grandparents, at least genetically, so that is how I know your grandma(s) existed.

So you use basic logic to assume (correctly) that I have two grandmothers. Very good.

I use the exact same logic when coming to a belief in an intelligent Designer. Since chaos and chance cannot create order then we must conclude that the "ordered" universe came to be by something other than chaos and chance. When we put something in order we use a thought process and build a plan. We then execute that plan and put something in order. For instance, if I want to build a model car I don't just throw it in the air and expect it to fall to the ground all assembled. I have to make it happen by using a thought process, a plan, and a certain amount of intelligence.

The universe, the living cell, the eyeball, etc., are all examples of complex, ordered "models" that didn't not just come to exist by chance.

Yet another false equivalence.

The only observable "order" in the universe all stems from the various orders of physics and chemistry. Because the universe is not perfectly uniform the slightest variance invokes gravity. So if you can imagine that every single particle of matter was an exact equal distance from every other particle of matter then gravity would be neutralized and the universe would be in complete stasis. If there was an "intelligent designer" who "created order" then that would be the "perfect" universe with "order" everywhere.

However the universe is not uniform and the mere fact that matter is not evenly distributed results in the formation of planets, stars, galaxies, etc, etc. We live in a chaotic universe. Planets, stars and galaxies collide with one another. That also demonstrates that your imaginary "intelligent designer" is far from "perfect" since what he "created" is constantly obliterating and reforming itself.

The laws of physics govern the universe and they stipulate that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So logically your "intelligent designer" cannot be omnipotent either because he has alleged "created" something that he cannot destroy ergo he is not omnipotent.

Now if you want to get into biology the same natural laws govern the formation of an eyeball. But since you are awestruck at the mere concept it would be a waste of time trying to get you to comprehend how they occurred through natural selection. Instead I will refer you to the Dover, PA court ruling where a conservative judge threw out the illogical nonsense claim of an "intelligent designer" since it was proven without any doubt whatsoever that it was merely an "evolution" of the debunked "creationism" mythology that the Supreme Court had already ruled against.

 

[DriftingSand]

Because you didn't just magically come into being from the dust of this earth. Like everyone else you had two parents and 4 grandparents, at least genetically, so that is how I know your grandma(s) existed.

So you use basic logic to assume (correctly) that I have two grandmothers. Very good.

I use the exact same logic when coming to a belief in an intelligent Designer. Since chaos and chance cannot create order then we must conclude that the "ordered" universe came to be by something other than chaos and chance. When we put something in order we use a thought process and build a plan. We then execute that plan and put something in order. For instance, if I want to build a model car I don't just throw it in the air and expect it to fall to the ground all assembled. I have to make it happen by using a thought process, a plan, and a certain amount of intelligence.

The universe, the living cell, the eyeball, etc., are all examples of complex, ordered "models" that didn't not just come to exist by chance.

Yet another false equivalence.

The only observable "order" in the universe all stems from the various orders of physics and chemistry. Because the universe is not perfectly uniform the slightest variance invokes gravity. So if you can imagine that every single particle of matter was an exact equal distance from every other particle of matter then gravity would be neutralized and the universe would be in complete stasis. If there was an "intelligent designer" who "created order" then that would be the "perfect" universe with "order" everywhere.

However the universe is not uniform and the mere fact that matter is not evenly distributed results in the formation of planets, stars, galaxies, etc, etc. We live in a chaotic universe. Planets, stars and galaxies collide with one another. That also demonstrates that your imaginary "intelligent designer" is far from "perfect" since what he "created" is constantly obliterating and reforming itself.

The laws of physics govern the universe and they stipulate that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So logically your "intelligent designer" cannot be omnipotent either because he has alleged "created" something that he cannot destroy ergo he is not omnipotent.

Now if you want to get into biology the same natural laws govern the formation of an eyeball. But since you are awestruck at the mere concept it would be a waste of time trying to get you to comprehend how they occurred through natural selection. Instead I will refer you to the Dover, PA court ruling where a conservative judge threw out the illogical nonsense claim of an "intelligent designer" since it was proven without any doubt whatsoever that it was merely an "evolution" of the debunked "creationism" mythology that the Supreme Court had already ruled against.

Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences. Order isn't created by chance and chaos. Science means "knowledge." Since we "know" that chaos doesn't create order then logic FORCES us to conclude that order was/is ordered.

I realize that secular, "religious" scientists refuse to accept the idea of "irreducible complexity" but having read Michael Behe's book on the subject I have no choice but to conclude that an eyeball didn't "evolve" in small increments or stages. What benefit would a non-seeing eye be to an evolving organism? What purpose would a half-evolved eye be to any organism? None!!

So ... you really have no logical explanation for why chaos would form a universe nor can you explain what purpose evolution would have for a non-functioning organ or any other complex, non-functioning, organic structure.

But I admire the deep faith you have in your science gods.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So you use basic logic to assume (correctly) that I have two grandmothers. Very good.

I use the exact same logic when coming to a belief in an intelligent Designer. Since chaos and chance cannot create order then we must conclude that the "ordered" universe came to be by something other than chaos and chance. When we put something in order we use a thought process and build a plan. We then execute that plan and put something in order. For instance, if I want to build a model car I don't just throw it in the air and expect it to fall to the ground all assembled. I have to make it happen by using a thought process, a plan, and a certain amount of intelligence.

The universe, the living cell, the eyeball, etc., are all examples of complex, ordered "models" that didn't not just come to exist by chance.

Yet another false equivalence.

The only observable "order" in the universe all stems from the various orders of physics and chemistry. Because the universe is not perfectly uniform the slightest variance invokes gravity. So if you can imagine that every single particle of matter was an exact equal distance from every other particle of matter then gravity would be neutralized and the universe would be in complete stasis. If there was an "intelligent designer" who "created order" then that would be the "perfect" universe with "order" everywhere.

However the universe is not uniform and the mere fact that matter is not evenly distributed results in the formation of planets, stars, galaxies, etc, etc. We live in a chaotic universe. Planets, stars and galaxies collide with one another. That also demonstrates that your imaginary "intelligent designer" is far from "perfect" since what he "created" is constantly obliterating and reforming itself.

The laws of physics govern the universe and they stipulate that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So logically your "intelligent designer" cannot be omnipotent either because he has alleged "created" something that he cannot destroy ergo he is not omnipotent.

Now if you want to get into biology the same natural laws govern the formation of an eyeball. But since you are awestruck at the mere concept it would be a waste of time trying to get you to comprehend how they occurred through natural selection. Instead I will refer you to the Dover, PA court ruling where a conservative judge threw out the illogical nonsense claim of an "intelligent designer" since it was proven without any doubt whatsoever that it was merely an "evolution" of the debunked "creationism" mythology that the Supreme Court had already ruled against.

Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences. Order isn't created by chance and chaos. Science means "knowledge." Since we "know" that chaos doesn't create order then logic FORCES us to conclude that order was/is ordered.

I realize that secular, "religious" scientists refuse to accept the idea of "irreducible complexity" but having read Michael Behe's book on the subject I have no choice but to conclude that an eyeball didn't "evolve" in small increments or stages. What benefit would a non-seeing eye be to an evolving organism? What purpose would a half-evolved eye be to any organism? None!!

So ... you really have no logical explanation for why chaos would form a universe nor can you explain what purpose evolution would have for a non-functioning organ or any other complex, non-functioning, organic structure.

But I admire the deep faith you have in your science gods.

Thank you for conceding that you cannot follow basic logic, or the sciences for that matter.

Let me refute this nonsense;

What purpose would a half-evolved eye be to any organism? None!!

If you were capable of logic you would be able to comprehend that plants are able to "follow the sun" because of cells that are receptive to sunlight and use chemical triggers to cause other cells to expand and contract (similar to muscles) so that the plant is receiving the optimal amount of sunlight available.

Now consider primitive life forms that are in the ocean and also absorbing sunlight as a means to grow. If a predator life form were to be in the vicinity they would have no awareness until it was too late. However if they were to have cells that could detect the presence of a predator obscuring the sunlight that would be an evolutionary advantage and enable them to move elsewhere. So all it takes is a cell that is light sensitive on order to be able to "see". From there different cells evolved to react to different wavelengths of light. Other cells evolved to make the light sensitive cells move so as to cover a greater area.

The life forms that developed cells that were sensitive to light managed to avoid predators and survived to reproduce. Given the millions and millions of years of evolution the eye has evolved to it's current state. However the human eye is far from perfect. It cannot see in the dark and it cannot see infrared and ultraviolet. It is susceptible to being mislead and it can be fooled by camoflage. It has difficulty focusing properly which accounts for why 50% of the population need some kind of glasses/contacts.

So yes, a "half-evolved" eye was very useful from an evolutionary perspective and the variety of light sensitive cells in both flora and fauna is proof that it has come from humble beginnings to what we have today.

So explain why your "intelligent designer" made such an imperfect eye? Is this just more evidence that he is far from intelligent and not very good at design either?

 

[Hollie]

So you use basic logic to assume (correctly) that I have two grandmothers. Very good.

I use the exact same logic when coming to a belief in an intelligent Designer. Since chaos and chance cannot create order then we must conclude that the "ordered" universe came to be by something other than chaos and chance. When we put something in order we use a thought process and build a plan. We then execute that plan and put something in order. For instance, if I want to build a model car I don't just throw it in the air and expect it to fall to the ground all assembled. I have to make it happen by using a thought process, a plan, and a certain amount of intelligence.

The universe, the living cell, the eyeball, etc., are all examples of complex, ordered "models" that didn't not just come to exist by chance.

Yet another false equivalence.

The only observable "order" in the universe all stems from the various orders of physics and chemistry. Because the universe is not perfectly uniform the slightest variance invokes gravity. So if you can imagine that every single particle of matter was an exact equal distance from every other particle of matter then gravity would be neutralized and the universe would be in complete stasis. If there was an "intelligent designer" who "created order" then that would be the "perfect" universe with "order" everywhere.

However the universe is not uniform and the mere fact that matter is not evenly distributed results in the formation of planets, stars, galaxies, etc, etc. We live in a chaotic universe. Planets, stars and galaxies collide with one another. That also demonstrates that your imaginary "intelligent designer" is far from "perfect" since what he "created" is constantly obliterating and reforming itself.

The laws of physics govern the universe and they stipulate that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. So logically your "intelligent designer" cannot be omnipotent either because he has alleged "created" something that he cannot destroy ergo he is not omnipotent.

Now if you want to get into biology the same natural laws govern the formation of an eyeball. But since you are awestruck at the mere concept it would be a waste of time trying to get you to comprehend how they occurred through natural selection. Instead I will refer you to the Dover, PA court ruling where a conservative judge threw out the illogical nonsense claim of an "intelligent designer" since it was proven without any doubt whatsoever that it was merely an "evolution" of the debunked "creationism" mythology that the Supreme Court had already ruled against.

Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences. Order isn't created by chance and chaos. Science means "knowledge." Since we "know" that chaos doesn't create order then logic FORCES us to conclude that order was/is ordered.

I realize that secular, "religious" scientists refuse to accept the idea of "irreducible complexity" but having read Michael Behe's book on the subject I have no choice but to conclude that an eyeball didn't "evolve" in small increments or stages. What benefit would a non-seeing eye be to an evolving organism? What purpose would a half-evolved eye be to any organism? None!!

So ... you really have no logical explanation for why chaos would form a universe nor can you explain what purpose evolution would have for a non-functioning organ or any other complex, non-functioning, organic structure.

But I admire the deep faith you have in your science gods.

You really should take the time to learn some basic principles of science before you hurl silly terms such as: "Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences".

Do you have idea just how nonsensical that is?

Secondly, the creationist worship of the eye as some marvel of design is, unfortunately, a failing of creationists to study the actual science. Behe has long ago discarded his credibility as an objective observer by aligning himself with more extreme of the creation ministries.

Your worship of the eye and of Behe makes you just another victim of science fraud perpetrated by extremist fundies.


More creationist misconceptions about the eye - The Panda's Thumb

Jonathan Sarfati is, as you know, associated with one of the most notoriously angry and fraudulent creationist groups that prays on the gullible: About Us - creation.com



If you read their "about us" web page, their just another in a long list of hacks and charlatans who press an extremist religious agenda under the burqa of "creationism".

About Us - creation.com



Unfortunately, you have allowed yourself to be victimized by religious extremists who exploit the ignorance and vulnerabilities of those like you.

CA113.1: Evolution of the eye.





CB301: Eye complexity

Claim CB301:

The eye is too complex to have evolved.
Source:

Brown, Walt, 1995. In the Beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Scientific Creation, p. 7.
Hitching, Francis, 1982. The Neck of the Giraffe, New York: Meridian, pp. 66-68.
Response:

This is the quintessential example of the argument from incredulity. The source making the claim usually quotes Darwin saying that the evolution of the eye seems "absurd in the highest degree". However, Darwin follows that statement with a three-and-a-half-page proposal of intermediate stages through which eyes might have evolved via gradual steps (Darwin 1872).

photosensitive cell
aggregates of pigment cells without a nerve
an optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells and covered by translucent skin
pigment cells forming a small depression
pigment cells forming a deeper depression
the skin over the depression taking a lens shape
muscles allowing the lens to adjust

All of these steps are known to be viable because all exist in animals living today. The increments between these steps are slight and may be broken down into even smaller increments. Natural selection should, under many circumstances, favor the increments. Since eyes do not fossilize well, we do not know that the development of the eye followed exactly that path, but we certainly cannot claim that no path exists.

 

[DriftingSand]

=Hollie;9223768]

You really should take the time to learn some basic principles of science before you hurl silly terms such as: "Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences".

Do you have idea just how nonsensical that is?

Scientific discovery requires order. No scientist of any particular discipline does any serious research in a chaotic manner. Do you see how ridiculous you sound when you postulate otherwise?

Secondly, the creationist worship of the eye as some marvel of design is, unfortunately, a failing of creationists to study the actual science. Behe has long ago discarded his credibility as an objective observer by aligning himself with more extreme of the creation ministries.

Your worship of the eye and of Behe makes you just another victim of science fraud perpetrated by extremist fundies.

Claiming to discredit Behe and actually discrediting him are two different things. You should take the time to learn the difference. It might help you look less silly in the future.

This is the quintessential example of the argument from incredulity. The source making the claim usually quotes Darwin saying that the evolution of the eye seems "absurd in the highest degree". However, Darwin follows that statement with a three-and-a-half-page proposal of intermediate stages through which eyes might have evolved via gradual steps (Darwin 1872).

photosensitive cell
aggregates of pigment cells without a nerve
an optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells and covered by translucent skin
pigment cells forming a small depression
pigment cells forming a deeper depression
the skin over the depression taking a lens shape
muscles allowing the lens to adjust

All of these steps are known to be viable because all exist in animals living today. The increments between these steps are slight and may be broken down into even smaller increments. Natural selection should, under many circumstances, favor the increments. Since eyes do not fossilize well, we do not know that the development of the eye followed exactly that path, but we certainly cannot claim that no path exists.

You miserably fail to answer the underlying question(s):

Why did an evolving organism find it necessary to "evolve" a "pigment cell without a nerve?" Why did future generations of this organism retain a "pigment cell without a nerve" if it served ZERO purpose? Why did it then "evolve" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose? Why, then, did it continue evolving this purposeless "depression" over the next million or billion years? No reason whatsoever. To believe such nonsense requires a certain level of insanity.

 

[Hollie]

=Hollie;9223768]

You really should take the time to learn some basic principles of science before you hurl silly terms such as: "Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences".

Do you have idea just how nonsensical that is?

Scientific discovery requires order. No scientist of any particular discipline does any serious research in a chaotic manner. Do you see how ridiculous you sound when you postulate otherwise?

Secondly, the creationist worship of the eye as some marvel of design is, unfortunately, a failing of creationists to study the actual science. Behe has long ago discarded his credibility as an objective observer by aligning himself with more extreme of the creation ministries.

Your worship of the eye and of Behe makes you just another victim of science fraud perpetrated by extremist fundies.

Claiming to discredit Behe and actually discrediting him are two different things. You should take the time to learn the difference. It might help you look less silly in the future.

This is the quintessential example of the argument from incredulity. The source making the claim usually quotes Darwin saying that the evolution of the eye seems "absurd in the highest degree". However, Darwin follows that statement with a three-and-a-half-page proposal of intermediate stages through which eyes might have evolved via gradual steps (Darwin 1872).

photosensitive cell
aggregates of pigment cells without a nerve
an optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells and covered by translucent skin
pigment cells forming a small depression
pigment cells forming a deeper depression
the skin over the depression taking a lens shape
muscles allowing the lens to adjust

All of these steps are known to be viable because all exist in animals living today. The increments between these steps are slight and may be broken down into even smaller increments. Natural selection should, under many circumstances, favor the increments. Since eyes do not fossilize well, we do not know that the development of the eye followed exactly that path, but we certainly cannot claim that no path exists.

You miserably fail to answer the underlying question(s):

Why did an evolving organism find it necessary to "evolve" a "pigment cell without a nerve?" Why did future generations of this organism retain a "pigment cell without a nerve" if it served ZERO purpose? Why did it then "evolve" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose? Why, then, did it continue evolving this purposeless "depression" over the next million or billion years? No reason whatsoever. To believe such nonsense requires a certain level of insanity.

I see the problem you're faced with. You view the religion you were given as under attack on two levels.

1. Biological evolution over time scales of millions of years us a direct contradiction to your young/flat earth biblical literalism.

2. How is it possible that such incompetent gods could "design" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose?


Here again we see the results and dangers of religious extremism. Had you ever studied biology and biological evolution, you would know that nature is imperfect and that evolution displays starts, stops and even utter dead ends.

Why are your gods such incompetent "designers"?

 

[GISMYS]

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; 17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 TIMOTHY 3:16-17For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. 12 For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. GALATIONS 1:11-12=====No prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. 2 PETER 1:21

 

[DriftingSand]

=Hollie;9223768]

You really should take the time to learn some basic principles of science before you hurl silly terms such as: "Physics and chemistry are "ordered" sciences".

Do you have idea just how nonsensical that is?

Scientific discovery requires order. No scientist of any particular discipline does any serious research in a chaotic manner. Do you see how ridiculous you sound when you postulate otherwise?

Claiming to discredit Behe and actually discrediting him are two different things. You should take the time to learn the difference. It might help you look less silly in the future.

This is the quintessential example of the argument from incredulity. The source making the claim usually quotes Darwin saying that the evolution of the eye seems "absurd in the highest degree". However, Darwin follows that statement with a three-and-a-half-page proposal of intermediate stages through which eyes might have evolved via gradual steps (Darwin 1872).

photosensitive cell
aggregates of pigment cells without a nerve
an optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells and covered by translucent skin
pigment cells forming a small depression
pigment cells forming a deeper depression
the skin over the depression taking a lens shape
muscles allowing the lens to adjust

All of these steps are known to be viable because all exist in animals living today. The increments between these steps are slight and may be broken down into even smaller increments. Natural selection should, under many circumstances, favor the increments. Since eyes do not fossilize well, we do not know that the development of the eye followed exactly that path, but we certainly cannot claim that no path exists.

You miserably fail to answer the underlying question(s):

Why did an evolving organism find it necessary to "evolve" a "pigment cell without a nerve?" Why did future generations of this organism retain a "pigment cell without a nerve" if it served ZERO purpose? Why did it then "evolve" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose? Why, then, did it continue evolving this purposeless "depression" over the next million or billion years? No reason whatsoever. To believe such nonsense requires a certain level of insanity.

I see the problem you're faced with. You view the religion you were given as under attack on two levels.

1. Biological evolution over time scales of millions of years us a direct contradiction to your young/flat earth biblical literalism.

2. How is it possible that such incompetent gods could "design" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose?

Here again we see the results and dangers of religious extremism. Had you ever studied biology and biological evolution, you would know that nature is imperfect and that evolution displays starts, stops and even utter dead ends.

Why are your gods such incompetent "designers"?

hahaha. Total sidestep. Can't answer the question? Just say so. Once again ... why would an organism "evolve" a useless lump of tissue and hang on to it for vast periods of time for no particular reason? Did the young organism think that someday it would like to see? Was it planning for the future of its posterity?

You have NO logical answer. PERIOD!! You MUST believe your insane hypothesis on pure faith coupled with some secular fantasy.

 

[Hollie]

Scientific discovery requires order. No scientist of any particular discipline does any serious research in a chaotic manner. Do you see how ridiculous you sound when you postulate otherwise?

Claiming to discredit Behe and actually discrediting him are two different things. You should take the time to learn the difference. It might help you look less silly in the future.

You miserably fail to answer the underlying question(s):

Why did an evolving organism find it necessary to "evolve" a "pigment cell without a nerve?" Why did future generations of this organism retain a "pigment cell without a nerve" if it served ZERO purpose? Why did it then "evolve" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose? Why, then, did it continue evolving this purposeless "depression" over the next million or billion years? No reason whatsoever. To believe such nonsense requires a certain level of insanity.

I see the problem you're faced with. You view the religion you were given as under attack on two levels.

1. Biological evolution over time scales of millions of years us a direct contradiction to your young/flat earth biblical literalism.

2. How is it possible that such incompetent gods could "design" a "pigment cell was a small depression" when THAT served ZERO purpose?

Here again we see the results and dangers of religious extremism. Had you ever studied biology and biological evolution, you would know that nature is imperfect and that evolution displays starts, stops and even utter dead ends.

Why are your gods such incompetent "designers"?

hahaha. Total sidestep. Can't answer the question? Just say so. Once again ... why would an organism "evolve" a useless lump of tissue and hang on to it for vast periods of time for no particular reason? Did the young organism think that someday it would like to see? Was it planning for the future of its posterity?

You have NO logical answer. PERIOD!! You MUST believe your insane hypothesis on pure faith coupled with some secular fantasy.

I addressed your comment in the post you quoted.

"Here again we see the results and dangers of religious extremism. Had you ever studied biology and biological evolution, you would know that nature is imperfect and that evolution displays starts, stops and even utter dead ends."

What you cannot address is why your gods would "design" something you call useless.

Why are your gods such incompetent "designers"?

How do you explain vestigial organs? Why would your gods "design" organs and appendages that are "useless"?