Q about arguments for God's existence.

[alexwenzel]

But you do have to have an explanation of machinery. Or else, how would you recognize it? Kindly point me to something that was not intelligently designed? That way, the next time I see something, a toaster or a daisy - I can recognize the difference, I'll have an explanation of machinery.

You've attempted to assume your conclusion in the example you gave (of a false dichotomy), btw.

Fail. This is the trouble with this nonsense. Not a shred of evidence....and then you can't even form a cogent argument? Jesus christ.....

Keep reading your google bible

---

In order to recognized that an explanation is the best, you don't have to have an explanation of the explanation. That's an elementary point in the philosophy of science. Suppose of astronauts were to find on the back side of the moon a pile of machinery there, that had not been left by american or Russian cosmonauts, what would be the best explanation for that machinery? Clearly would be some sort of exterrestrial intelligence that left the machinery there, and you don't have to have an explanation of who these exterrestrials were, or came from, or how they got there, or anything of that sort to recognize that the best explanation of these machinery is intelligent design. In order to recognized that an explanation is the best, you don't have to have an explanation of the explanation.

So, your justification is yet another argument from ignorance.

Gotcha.

Once there was nothing... BAM... then there was everything! Including matter, time and space. Show me YOUR ignorance and proof to that.

Hurry! run to your google bible!!