(January 1, 2019 at 1:43 am)Bucky Ball Wrote:

Quote:Nope.  Nice try though.

If you understood what scientific study does and does not attempt to do, you would realize why it's hard to take you seriously.  As soon as you start digging at the "supernatural" and making negative assertions, you're starting to go in the other direction.  What you're obviously doing is taking the conclusions of others, who are actual scientists, and applying it to your belief that there is no God or even a need.

Bla bla bla. 

LOL. pathetic liar. No one said anything about the "supernatural". Nothing. 

Neither did I make any negative assertion, or go in "another" direction. 
All that garbage is nothing but a bunch of meaningless drivel to deflect from the fact that you misinterpreted the very article you ignorantly posted. 
You are nothing but an ignorant troll and a total fraud. 

Still no defined god. Still no defined "complexity". Still no established boundaries. Still absolutely nothing.  
Time you found another hobby which you have some skill at. You're really bad at this one. 

Get back to your prayers and talking to your imaginary friends, Bozo.

Whatever dude.  Go cry and find something else to make up.  I guess maybe you could actually believe your own nonsense, but I don't know that it makes your ignorance any better.

(December 31, 2018 at 5:22 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote:

(December 31, 2018 at 4:59 pm)CDF47 Wrote: OK, so now how do you really feel?!?!

If only you would be half as quick to also pick up on what everyone else on this thread who are more knowledgeable about the real state of modern biological science have spent the length of this 11000 post trying to explain to you,  instead of tediously regurgitating as you do the same chewed deggeral from the same handful of miserable failures of pseudoscientific charlatans you so misguidedly revere.

I don't find the truth here.  I find the truth in the design of living systems.

---

(December 31, 2018 at 6:48 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote:

(December 31, 2018 at 4:59 pm)CDF47 Wrote: Watch the video in my signature.

Why? I already know you are lying.

Because a picture can say a 1000 words.  Watch it operate.

---

(December 31, 2018 at 10:23 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: "Complexity" remains undefined.
No one has ever defined *exactly* what is "too complex" (in terms of either chemistry or function) to arise naturally, and thus require a designer.
No one can say exactly what the boundary is.
No one can say or provide examples of "not complex enough" - thus needs no designer, or what the exact boundary is for "too complex, needs a designer".
"Complexity" is a fake undefined category.

Everyone knows what complexity is.  DNA is not only complex but functional like machine code.

(January 1, 2019 at 3:50 am)CDF47 Wrote: Everyone knows what complexity is.  DNA is not only complex but functional like machine code.

    

(January 1, 2019 at 3:50 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(December 31, 2018 at 5:22 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: If only you would be half as quick to also pick up on what everyone else on this thread who are more knowledgeable about the real state of modern biological science have spent the length of this 11000 post trying to explain to you,  instead of tediously regurgitating as you do the same chewed deggeral from the same handful of miserable failures of pseudoscientific charlatans you so misguidedly revere.

I don't find the truth here.  I find the truth in the design of living systems.

---

(December 31, 2018 at 6:48 pm)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Why? I already know you are lying.

Because a picture can say a 1000 words.  Watch it operate.

---

(December 31, 2018 at 10:23 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: "Complexity" remains undefined.
No one has ever defined *exactly* what is "too complex" (in terms of either chemistry or function) to arise naturally, and thus require a designer.
No one can say exactly what the boundary is.
No one can say or provide examples of "not complex enough" - thus needs no designer, or what the exact boundary is for "too complex, needs a designer".
"Complexity" is a fake undefined category.

Everyone knows what complexity is.  DNA is not only complex but functional like machine code.

"Complexity" became an issue for the atheists when people started suggesting it supported creation.  So now, it's not only saying "no god", but "no complexity."  Your Average Joe isn't going to have a problem with the term or even a reasonably educated child, and you can understand what it means without needing a dictionary.  Even a good number of atheists use the term, but you'll most likely see it applied differently, and in a way that attempts to explain away belief in a Creator.

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: "Complexity" became an issue for the atheists when people started suggesting it supported creation.

 No... it became an issue when Creationists began using it because their normal, theistic, attemps at throwing religion into education was blocked and they hd to change tack.

To the efect that a lot of thei early, revamped, books were simply 'Copy/paste/edit with 'Creation' directly replaced with 'Inteligent design' and nothing else adjusted in the text.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: So now, it's not only saying "no god", but "no complexity."

No... athiets, non thiests, arent' saying such things.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: Your Average Joe isn't going to have a problem with the term or even a reasonably educated child,

 Are we not doing phrasing any more? Really M4X.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: ... and you can understand what it means without needing a dictionary.

Except people here on the forum keep explaining to yourself about;

1) What dictionaries are for.

2) How dictionaries are used

3) That words in general are descripters of ideas and hence their meanings change drastically given the context of the sentences they appear in.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: ... and in a way that attempts to explain away belief in a Creator.

 Again, no one here is doing any such thing.
Thiets enter the forum and state their piece about their diety's. CDF47 inculded.
The Atheists and Notheists here abouts then, generally, respond with "Well.. what/where is your edivende (Physical etc) for such a thing?"
That people believe in all sorts of things as true is really with out any doubt.
I believe I'll go and have another beer.



Not at work.

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote:

(January 1, 2019 at 3:50 am)CDF47 Wrote: I don't find the truth here.  I find the truth in the design of living systems.

---

Because a picture can say a 1000 words.  Watch it operate.

---

Everyone knows what complexity is.  DNA is not only complex but functional like machine code.

"Complexity" became an issue for the atheists when people started suggesting it supported creation.  So now, it's not only saying "no god", but "no complexity."  Your Average Joe isn't going to have a problem with the term or even a reasonably educated child, and you can understand what it means without needing a dictionary.  Even a good number of atheists use the term, but you'll most likely see it applied differently, and in a way that attempts to explain away belief in a Creator.

And that's and absurd statement

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:24 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: "Complexity" became an issue for the atheists when people started suggesting it supported creation.

 No... it became an issue when Creationists began using it because their normal, theistic, attemps at throwing religion into education was blocked and they hd to change tack.

To the efect that a lot of thei early, revamped, books were simply 'Copy/paste/edit with 'Creation' directly replaced with 'Inteligent design' and nothing else adjusted in the text.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: So now, it's not only saying "no god", but "no complexity."

No... athiets, non thiests, arent' saying such things.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: Your Average Joe isn't going to have a problem with the term or even a reasonably educated child,

 Are we not doing phrasing any more? Really M4X.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: ... and you can understand what it means without needing a dictionary.

Except people here on the forum keep explaining to yourself about;

1) What dictionaries are for.

2) How dictionaries are used

3) That words in general are descripters of ideas and hence their meanings change drastically given the context of the sentences they appear in.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: ... and in a way that attempts to explain away belief in a Creator.

 Again, no one here is doing any such thing.
Thiets enter the forum and state their piece about their diety's. CDF47 inculded.
The Atheists and Notheists here abouts then, generally, respond with "Well.. what/where is your edivende (Physical etc) for such a thing?"
That people believe in all sorts of things as true is really with out any doubt.
I believe I'll go and have another beer.



Not at work.

Oh no peebo it's just the evil atheists denying creationism .It's got nothing to do with the fact ID advocates fail at defining what they mean .

(January 1, 2019 at 5:24 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: "Complexity" became an issue for the atheists when people started suggesting it supported creation.

 No... it became an issue when Creationists began using it because their normal, theistic, attemps at throwing religion into education was blocked and they hd to change tack.

To the efect that a lot of thei early, revamped, books were simply 'Copy/paste/edit with 'Creation' directly replaced with 'Inteligent design' and nothing else adjusted in the text.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: So now, it's not only saying "no god", but "no complexity."

No... athiets, non thiests, arent' saying such things.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: Your Average Joe isn't going to have a problem with the term or even a reasonably educated child,

 Are we not doing phrasing any more? Really M4X.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: ... and you can understand what it means without needing a dictionary.

Except people here on the forum keep explaining to yourself about;

1) What dictionaries are for.

2) How dictionaries are used

3) That words in general are descripters of ideas and hence their meanings change drastically given the context of the sentences they appear in.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: ... and in a way that attempts to explain away belief in a Creator.

 Again, no one here is doing any such thing.
Thiets enter the forum and state their piece about their diety's. CDF47 inculded.
The Atheists and Notheists here abouts then, generally, respond with "Well.. what/where is your edivende (Physical etc) for such a thing?"
That people believe in all sorts of things as true is really with out any doubt.
I believe I'll go and have another beer.



Not at work.

No, sorry.  Atheism and science don't go together.  It's nonsense based on more nonsense.  If your foundation is flawed, then what you perceive based on it will also have be flawed.  We don't need anymore nutties telling people that the universe came from nothing, when science has shown us that no natural process creates, generates, or forms something from nothing.  It's ridiculous at its core.  Just as organic life doesn't randomly generate by some accident from inorganic matter, then gain in complexity over billions of years.   More nonsense concocted by nutty atheists.

Also, you don't tell me what dictionaries are for.  I can't make up my mind for myself.  If you want to go through life being a puppet and having everybody tell you what to think, then go for it.

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:44 am)Amarok Wrote:

(January 1, 2019 at 5:13 am)T0 Th3 M4X Wrote: "Complexity" became an issue for the atheists when people started suggesting it supported creation.  So now, it's not only saying "no god", but "no complexity."  Your Average Joe isn't going to have a problem with the term or even a reasonably educated child, and you can understand what it means without needing a dictionary.  Even a good number of atheists use the term, but you'll most likely see it applied differently, and in a way that attempts to explain away belief in a Creator.

And that's and absurd statement

---

(January 1, 2019 at 5:24 am)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote:  No... it became an issue when Creationists began using it because their normal, theistic, attemps at throwing religion into education was blocked and they hd to change tack.

To the efect that a lot of thei early, revamped, books were simply 'Copy/paste/edit with 'Creation' directly replaced with 'Inteligent design' and nothing else adjusted in the text.

---

No... athiets, non thiests, arent' saying such things.

---

 Are we not doing phrasing any more? Really M4X.

---

Except people here on the forum keep explaining to yourself about;

1) What dictionaries are for.

2) How dictionaries are used

3) That words in general are descripters of ideas and hence their meanings change drastically given the context of the sentences they appear in.

---

 Again, no one here is doing any such thing.
Thiets enter the forum and state their piece about their diety's. CDF47 inculded.
The Atheists and Notheists here abouts then, generally, respond with "Well.. what/where is your edivende (Physical etc) for such a thing?"
That people believe in all sorts of things as true is really with out any doubt.
I believe I'll go and have another beer.



Not at work.

Oh no peebo it's just the evil atheists denying creationism .It's got nothing to do with the fact ID advocates fail at defining what they mean .

Nah, just get sick of the crybaby atheists who try to censor books and other media.  Let people explore and think for themselves.

Quote:No, sorry.  Atheism and science don't go together.  It's nonsense based on more nonsense.  If your foundation is flawed, then what you perceive based on it will also have be flawed.  We don't need anymore nutties telling people that the universe came from nothing, when science has shown us that no natural process creates, generates, or forms something from nothing.  It's ridiculous at its core.  Just as organic life doesn't randomly generate by some accident from inorganic matter, then gain in complexity over billions of years.   More nonsense concocted by nutty atheists.

Also, you don't tell me what dictionaries are for.  I can't make up my mind for myself.  If you want to go through life being a puppet and having everybody tell you what to think, then go for it.

So a bunch of arguments from credulity and straw men very good

Quote: Nah, just get sick of the crybaby atheists who try to censor books and other media.  Let people explore and think for themselves.

So a bunch of BS creationist whining and conspiracy tripe

What is the process that this intelligent designer used to make the DNA?
What was the process and where did it get the stuff?
Where is the evidence for the designing that cannot be accounted for by other means?

To me this is the "stuff exists therefore god" argument, which seems to be all they have now.

(January 1, 2019 at 6:04 am)Amarok Wrote:

Quote:No, sorry.  Atheism and science don't go together.  It's nonsense based on more nonsense.  If your foundation is flawed, then what you perceive based on it will also have be flawed.  We don't need anymore nutties telling people that the universe came from nothing, when science has shown us that no natural process creates, generates, or forms something from nothing.  It's ridiculous at its core.  Just as organic life doesn't randomly generate by some accident from inorganic matter, then gain in complexity over billions of years.   More nonsense concocted by nutty atheists.

Also, you don't tell me what dictionaries are for.  I can't make up my mind for myself.  If you want to go through life being a puppet and having everybody tell you what to think, then go for it.

So a bunch of arguments from credulity and straw men very good

Quote: Nah, just get sick of the crybaby atheists who try to censor books and other media.  Let people explore and think for themselves.

So a bunch of BS creationist whining and conspiracy tripe

Nope. Reality. Atheist nonsense.  They don't want to believe something so they start making things up.

"Someone says "creation" and "complexity" together, so now we don't accept the term "complexity."

---

(January 1, 2019 at 6:38 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: What is the process that this intelligent designer used to make the DNA?
What was the process and where did it get the stuff?
Where is the evidence for the designing that cannot be accounted for by other means?

To me this is the "stuff exists therefore god" argument, which seems to be all they have now.

- It says in Genesis 1.
- If God made the "stuff", then why would God need "the stuff" to make "the stuff."   (Your question isn't rationale)
- Well let's see you account for it by another means.  Can't wait to hear this.  Regardless, you can have two routes that could potentially lead to the same place.  Suggesting something new doesn't mean it replaces what is already known.

If you want to indicate it all happened naturally, then why should I disregard science and assume your idea is better?  Something from nothing?  Organic from inorganic, then gaining in complexity?  Is there are YT video that demonstrates no matter and *boom* matter.  If you have a link to one, I would love to see it.