(October 29, 2015 at 10:29 pm)jenny1972 Wrote:(October 29, 2015 at 9:47 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: I will not disagree with the possibility that some Creator "set up" the laws of the universe so that it would unfold in a manner by which the particles interacted in such a way as to produce life by natural processes. We know what almost all of those natural processes are, now. We know that evolution is a completely-unguided process that only appears orderly to our hunter-gatherer pattern seeking brains because of our inferences about agency.
When you argue that "life is complex, so God", it tells me you do not understand biology at all, and are therefore mistaken when you say that you accept evolution. You do not know what evolution is, what Rhythm correctly calls "The Modern Synthesis" (Darwin's theory, modified for the discovery of genetics, essentially). It's okay! Just learn it before you tell us that "life is complex so goddidit".
yes ill learn more about evolution im not sure why some people are convinced that learning more about evolution is going to convince me that evolution was not intelligently set up i think it would only increase my belief that it could only be intelligently organized to see actually how complex it actually is but thats ok . im glad some biologists are open to the possibility that an intelligent design could have put evolution into motion and im sure some biologists believe in God people have different opinions even scientists .
Well, biologists do have the highest percentage of atheists of any of the sciences. Above 75% I believe.
You may want to start with some Youtube videos by a scientist that goes by the name Potholer54. They are only about 10 minutes each, and might be helpful.
he has a very good series that starts here with the origin of the universe, and lead up to evolution. And no where does he ever state that organisms "told themselves how to develop they planned and then created their own course of development".
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
