(March 31, 2016 at 10:38 am)AAA Wrote:(March 31, 2016 at 10:00 am)LadyForCamus Wrote: In both atlas and 3A's case, the phenomenon they happily accept without a shred of physical evidence is in every conceivable way far more outrageous and unlikely than the phenomenon which they reject in SPITE of evidence beyond any reasonable doubt.
It's...amazing. I've never seen two people who hold such an extraordinary belief based solely on faith (made even more extraordinary and unlikely considering they are putting forth not just an anonymous intelligent designer, but the MGC...good luck connecting all those dots with science and sound logic, guys) babble on and on for so damned long about science and odds. Do you not hear yourselves? Do you not understand how ridiculously convoluted your thinking is?
Why is it outrageous to say that biological systems may have been designed, when intelligence is the only known cause capable of explaining what we know about cells? We babble about science and odds because these are the most informative tools for determining if current models are sufficient to explain the formation of life. I could go through a calculation of the odds of a functionally significant protein forming by chance if you want. You can disagree with the philosophy behind it, but disagreeing with the math is not a good idea. Math is the only way to truly prove anything.
Oh, please...I beg of you...don't start talking about odds. I think Esquilax's head might explode. And intelligence is not the only known cause...it's just the only known cause theists are willing to hear about. It's not my fault you spend your time arguing against a false understanding of evolution.
And I am still waiting for an answer from anyone as to why theists feel they don't need to present evidence of God. Any takers?
Nay_Sayer: “Nothing is impossible if you dream big enough, or in this case, nothing is impossible if you use a barrel of KY Jelly and a miniature horse.”
Wiser words were never spoken.
Wiser words were never spoken.