RE: The Argument From Design
August 3, 2011 at 5:28 am
(This post was last modified: August 3, 2011 at 11:47 am by ElDinero.)
No, listen, Godschild. We don't have to address the human eye at all. YOU have to address all the things we've raised in this thread. Why do we have an appendix? Why are we made with two kidneys if we can live with one? Why is there so much of the Earth that is uninhabitable to humans? Why are we required to sleep approx 30% of our lives? Why do a minority of fertilised eggs make it to full term? What kind of design is this?
You can't point to one specific example (which can be explained, by the way) and say 'explain that, if you can't that means I'm right'. Because if it's designed, it ALL has to be designed. Every last thing, from the womb to the pineapple. So why don't you answer our questions about these undoubtedly poor 'designs'.
I noticed you already misrepresented what one person asked, they said why don't we have big pads instead of toes and you said that you'd fall over without your big toe. That isn't what they were suggesting. So please read my post carefully and be cautious not to twist what I have said. Thanks.
You can't point to one specific example (which can be explained, by the way) and say 'explain that, if you can't that means I'm right'. Because if it's designed, it ALL has to be designed. Every last thing, from the womb to the pineapple. So why don't you answer our questions about these undoubtedly poor 'designs'.
I noticed you already misrepresented what one person asked, they said why don't we have big pads instead of toes and you said that you'd fall over without your big toe. That isn't what they were suggesting. So please read my post carefully and be cautious not to twist what I have said. Thanks.
