Evidence God Exists: Part II

[tavarish]

You're making fun of my text, and implying I lack education, and made the quip that my high school wants my diplomat back. And yet you don't know what the word exclusive means, which I bolded so that people didn't miss it. All the examples you give above are of species that use elements of nature, but not exclusively. Meaning no other species uses that same element of nature.

He's making fun of your text because it fails to address anything. Lots of organisms have unique features and use elements of nature for different purposes.

Here are some examples:

Crocodiles use plover birds to clean their teeth in a symbiotic relationship. This is exclusive to this species.



Bees collect pollen for nutrition. This is exclusive to this type of animal.

Some Chameleons use pigments in their body to change their color and blend with their environment. This is exclusive to this family.

There are countless other examples, but it's a rehash of your argument that "humans are uniqe therefore God exists". It does not follow - at all.

Water has many uses for us, but in the context of my post, I'm saying that God made fire controllable by water.

You saying that doesn't make it true. I can say the Great Juju up the mountain did it, and it would have the same validity. You need evidence for this sort of stuff. Water diffusing fire isn't evidence for God, it's evidence for water being able to diffuse fire.

You're arguing from ignorance.

That's another way. What exactly are you proving here? Did I say water is the only thing that puts out a fire? It isn't, but water is the most powerful combatant of fire.

No it isn't. It's actually quite inneffective in oil fires and electrical fires. Read: water makes it worse. Water is electrically conductive, and does absolutely nothing to grease or oil, as those substances don't dissolve easily. You should have said it's most effective for removing heat from some fires, which is a way to diffuse it, but not the only way, or the most effective way.

The most commonly used method of extinguishing a fire is to smother it using dry chemicals. With this, you take the air out of the equation, rather than decreasing the heat of the blaze. No air = no fire.

This is what is used in most fire extinguishers and in cases where there are highly volatile and inflammable substances around. Water CAN be used because it's one of the most abundant substances on earth, but it's not the most effective, not by a long shot.

This is so dumb I won't even address it. Okay, maybe I will. Oil is a fire accelerant, so of course adding that to the mix will make the fire more difficult to contain. But the best weapon is still water. If water didn't put out fire, imagine the pickle we'd be in. (Btw: pickles have medicinal values as well.)?

I just explained to you how water would be extremely ineffective in battling such fires. That's why you can have an oil spill in the middle of a lake and set fire to it.

I do find it funny you're calling other peoples' arguments dumb when you're making wild claim after wild claim and closing your eyes to any legitimate rebuttals.

Can you think of any other ‘everyday’ mineral which can easily destroy or put out another force of nature?

Again, water is not a mineral. But since you asked... salt is quite capable of easily destroying bacteria. And it's a mineral, too!

'Capable' and 'works every time' are two different things and you know it.

Water does not work every time. I gave you specific examples in which water on a fire makes it worse.

Smoke: Again, fire has been a necessity for the survival of man, and yet it is so dangerous and destructive. Without smoke fire would creep up and destroy people and their resources. The fact that there is smoke, and the pungent smell of smoke, shows that we were intelligently provided with fire as a tool, though there’s a built in mechanism meant to be a warning system.

This paragraph is so unbelievably ridiculous that I can't believe anyone would utter it in an attempt to demonstrate "intelligent design". Without smoke, "fire would creep up and destroy people"? Are you kidding me? What usually kills people in a fire? IT'S NOT THE FIRE! It is smoke inhalation!

Now you're turning into a PSA.

He's providing evidence for his claim, and from what I understand, you have nothing to bring to the table.

So, your "intelligent designer" provided us with a "warning system" that kills us! Some intelligence!

Water can kill us, and yet it has other crucial benefits. The inhalation of smoke in enclosed environments can be fatal, but now you're talking about fires that have raged out of control, or situations in which people have been trapped or foolishly remained indoors too long, etc. But all this is entirely a different issue. If you're going to paint these types of scenarios, then I can just as easily add face masks, or techniques such as laying low to the ground to avoid inhalation, which are considered very effective. But this whole thing is a different subject. What I was trying to point out is that when a fire is starting or approaching us, smoke serves as a warning that gives us time to act and either run or try to locate and put out the fire. Fire itself is more destructive and devastating than smoke.

You're obfuscating the point and shifting the goalposts here. Thor pointed out more people die of smoke inhalation than actual fires, and you shrugged it off and went on your way.

By the way, saying people are foolish for remaining indoors too long paints a picture of your fucking ridiculous and audacious nature. Did you think people like staying in burning buildings? Do you honestly think that they wouldn't have left if they had the chance?

Do you know a more effective method of warning for fire? A fucking smoke detector that can detect harmful odorless gases long before you see any smoke or any sign of danger. Why didn't God just give out those instead of having a method that kills you? Or better yet, why didn't he make us aware of gases that are harmful to us, rather than make them odorless? Perfect plan he's got.

You are unequivocally dishonest.

Medicinal Plants and Herbs: There is a plant or herb pretty much for every ailment out there.

Really? Show me the plant that cures cancer. Or macular degeneration. Or Parkinson's Disease. Or muscular dystrophy. Or Down's Syndrome. Or diabetes. Or cystic fibrosis. Etc, etc....

Have you ever heard of antioxidants, which help treat or prevent cancer and some of the other diseases you have mentioned? You also have to consider that not all the medicinal benefits of plants and herbs have been discovered. But you're missing the point. There's no reason, for the survival of its species, for bananas to evolutionarily develop a powerful antioxidant in its skin which has health benefits and is curative to man.

Please link to a study in which antioxidants from plants are used as a primary means of treating cancer or any other otherwise terminal illness.

You also contradict yourself by saying "not all the medicinal benefits of plants have been discovered", then saying "there is no reason for bananas to develop a powerful antioxidant in its skin". Did you perhaps think that the reason for this was not yet discovered? Or how about the fact that bananas are a product of selective cultivation made for the specific benefit of humans?

I don't know. That's the problem with atheists. They want to know everything right now, despite the fact we've been told and it has been written that certain mysteries will be revealed to us later..

I'm sorry, what?!

You're over here talking about some man in the sky gave you a bunch of natural gifts with zero evidence to back it up, saying this "must have been the work of God", effectively giving answers to questions you can't answer, and you have the sheer gall to say that atheists have a problem with wanting answers?

Answers aren't revealed by a higher power. It takes effort, time, and research into a topic to get to the bottom of things. Answers don't drop into your lap, and they sure as hell don't come around from you sitting on your ass talking to your imaginary friend. The only thing driving human intellectual progression is doubt and skepticim - not faith in a supernatural deity laying everything out for you in a book with numbered verses and vague and often inaccurate depictions of reality.

Bananas: If you observe how apes and certain natives and people peel bananas, you will have a clearer understanding of the following. Bananas have a handle at one end, which is how most people peel bananas. However, peeling it this way can sometimes mush the banana at that end and can be awkward. But if you peel the banana by pressing on the opposite tip and peeling from that end, you’ll end up with a perfect banana. There’s no reason for the banana’s survival as a species to have developed such a tip. It looks like someone out there has provided a means to easily peel the world’s most popular fruit without mangling the inside.

There is no reason the anteater needs to develop a long snout, it's ineffective at eating anything bigger than a medium sized marble. But if you look closely, it's the exact size needed to stick into anthills and suck up unsuspecting ants. It's like someone out there made the anteater's head in such a way that it would be easy for him to get food.

therefore God is an Anteater.

It doesn't matter. If Ray Comfort succumbed to this atheist argument, supposedly apologizing for his claim, well that's him, but it has nothing to do with me or my views. If I can believe in evolution as God's tool, then I can just as easily assert that hybridization is also God's tool, and he made it possible and gave us the intelligence to carry it out. What's important is how the banana ended up today, not what it was hundreds of years ago. And besides, bananas always had the tip I described on one end, making it easier to peel.

If one argument fails, just revert to "God did it" and all is well.

Apples are easy to eat, as are grapes. God did it there too.
Coconuts? Prickly pears? Poisonous mushrooms? Diarrhetic berries? Venomous plants? Not to mention salmonella and E-coli in meat and produce?

Guess God missed the memo.

Come to think of it, I wonder how many people had to get kicked in the teeth before they milked the first cow.