(January 14, 2016 at 4:07 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(January 14, 2016 at 3:50 pm)AAA Wrote: It's not an argument from ignorance. I think you got to this thread late, but this has been covered a lot. It's not "We don't know, therefore God", it's "We do know how it works, and it functions like things that we only see paralleled (although not nearly rivaled) by things designed from humans" Therefore maybe it requires intelligence to exist.
Yes, argument from analogy. Just as bad as argument from ignorance.
So, when have you eliminated all possible natural explanations? What peer reviewed journal is your paper published?
Why haven't the majority of biologists been swayed by your oh so convincing arguments?
Face it, you already had your conclusion, and you are constantly forcing the evidence to fit.
Do we have to eliminate every possibility except design before we can accept a designer to account for the design?
