RE: The Watchmaker: my fav argument
March 7, 2021 at 11:03 am
(This post was last modified: March 7, 2021 at 11:19 am by R00tKiT.)
(March 7, 2021 at 7:33 am)Five Wrote:(March 6, 2021 at 10:08 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Rehashing your initial thread post after criticizing participants hardly qualifies as engaging. Do better.
It's like you're not even here, reading the thread. Klo was asking "How is sand simple?" I answered by illustrating that if he understood how analogies worked, he'd see the answer to his question. Sand is simple in the context of the comparison. Don't tell me to do better when you're the one who's lost.
I don't think you understand analogies either given your condescending attitude towards my questions, aaaand this little dishonest move: You called it an argument, now, you changed it to analogy.
So... tell me more about who's lost.?
(March 6, 2021 at 11:25 pm)Eleven Wrote: Simply, it's not.
As much as you want to take this god puzzle piece and attempt to squeeze it into the pieces already naturally arranged, it just does not work.
Okay. So, presumably, human designed machines and the way they are combined are not indicative of an intelligent agent-us ? And don't tell me you saw manufacturers and all, it's not like you have to see every machine's manufacturer to call it a machine.
That's why I always stop there and declare that it's a matter of honesty... they tell me it's poisoning the well... No, it's not. You are reaching two different conclusions based on the same criteria : complexity. You either say you don't accept the criteria, or you really are dishonest. Go cleanse your wells..
(March 7, 2021 at 3:02 am)Seax Wrote: Yes, & no. Design has perfectly naturalistic explanations. All living organisms are products of design; natural selection. Every biological organism alive today is the product of millions of years of 'design.'
Great. So what..?
Shooting down a bird has a perfectly naturalistic explanation : a bullet penetrated his body with high impact and perforated critical organs. This natural explanation still doesn't dispense with the need of an agent-a hunter who intently directed the bullet towards the target. Disagree?
