Atheism vs. God's Existence

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

He had to "memorize and identify all the major nerves in the human cadavers" and yet he's "guessing the laryngeal nerve takes the seemingly strange route because it branches off at specific locations." Wow. Just fucking wow.

I would strongly recommend he ask for a rebate on his tuition.

50p's not going to be a lot of help.

Boru

[Crossless2.0]

Because he can't answer why there are design flaws in an intelligently designed organism, especially considering his intelligent agent is allegedly perfect. He'll whitwash over them, belittle them and ignore them, but he can't explain them.

Not that it's a real explanation, but I suppose the approved Christian answer is "sin". What else can he say, since he refuses to assess the state of nature outside his religious bubble?

[AAA]

Yeah, I know I'm in the wrong sub-forum but I don't know how to start my own forum. 

You don't need to start your own subforum (in fact you can't ), but there are subforums in the science section of this website.  Start a new thread in an appropriate one.

How do I do that?

[AAA]

There's so much going on in the cell that you don't even want to acknowledge. There are control mechanisms that make our electronic circuits rediculously childish. There are layers upon layers of information that are being continuously unpacked, read, and repacked. But you complain that your esophagus is too close to your trachea? You better be thankful that someone just happened to have an epiglottis in order for our species to survive the evolution of that setup.

You didn't acknowledge GB's the point; that an all powerful, all intelligent being should have used a little foresight in his planning.  All you gave in this response is more red herrings.  I wonder why they is?

Well I think I did acknowledge the point, but if you want me to reiterate it I can. I disagree with the assertion that the designer didn't use foresight. In fact, if the designer created life without some template to go by, the designer had tremendous foresight. If you asked us to design a cell today, we could not do it even with natural cells to use as a template. Imagine how impossible it would be for us to try to design a cell without any such template. It would take tremendous foresight.

[account_inactive]

You don't need to start your own subforum (in fact you can't ), but there are subforums in the science section of this website.  Start a new thread in an appropriate one.

How do I do that?

Click on the appropriate science section, go to one of the sub forums and look for the "Post Thread" button, should be on the top right.

[AAA]

I would strongly recommend he ask for a rebate on his tuition.

50p's not going to be a lot of help.

Boru

We were talking about humans vs. giraffes. Strangely enough we didn't dissect giraffes so I was guessing about it based on what was seen in humans.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

50p's not going to be a lot of help.

Boru

We were talking about humans vs. giraffes. Strangely enough we didn't dissect giraffes so I was guessing about it based on what was seen in humans.

Their point is that the same nerve that is found in humans is found in giraffes (and all other mammals) because we all inherited the pattern from a common ancestor. That ancestor didn't have necks like we do (part of why the best book to read about it is called Your Inner Fish), so the routing of the nerve didn't matter. However, as the same pattern was changed over time to evolve into the various mammal species, it couldn't simply "jump" to the other side of the bone it ran around; instead, it simply got longer and longer, in order to go up the neck and back down. In the extreme example, the giraffe, it makes a VERY long journey.

This is one of the thousands of ways you can see that we are all from common ancestry. [Edit to Add: And why we are skeptical of claims of design. A designer wouldn't do something as silly as running the nerve way up and back down, when a direct path would do, from the outset.]

As to your point about the Creator making a pre-formed pattern, which He knew life would follow in its evolution... um, okay. How is that different from just studying evolution as it is? It's certainly not the claims of Intelligent Design, which are essentially that life was deliberately shaped (by some unknown mechanism) by an outside crafter, in order that life as we know it might be here. It's the exact opposite claim. We can see that you recognize the insanity of that claim, by backing off from some of the Creationist elements of the ID movement, but frankly, your roots are showing, still.

[Ravenshire]

You didn't acknowledge GB's the point; that an all powerful, all intelligent being should have used a little foresight in his planning.  All you gave in this response is more red herrings.  I wonder why they is?

Well I think I did acknowledge the point, but if you want me to reiterate it I can. I disagree with the assertion that the designer didn't use foresight. In fact, if the designer created life without some template to go by, the designer had tremendous foresight. If you asked us to design a cell today, we could not do it even with natural cells to use as a template. Imagine how impossible it would be for us to try to design a cell without any such template. It would take tremendous foresight.

Are you seriously claiming that an omniscient designer didn't know millions of his creations would choke to death over that not so minor oversight? You really are portraying a truly ignorant "intelligent" designer.

[Cato]

You don't need to start your own subforum (in fact you can't ), but there are subforums in the science section of this website.  Start a new thread in an appropriate one.

How do I do that?

Go to an interior bathroom, shut the door, face the mirror and chant 'Bloody Mary' three times.

[Cyberman]

How do I do that?

Go to an interior bathroom, shut the door, face the mirror and chant 'Bloody Mary' three times and stay there..

Fixed that for you.