Evidence God Exists: Part II

[Edwardo Piet]

Well, don't you know, humans can state a sentence such as this one therefore there must be a divine sky daddy.

Besides, chocolate exists. Obvious proof of a loving God ( and one that appreciates deliciousness).

[AngelThMan]

I challenge anyone to name any other species that exclusively uses an element of nature.

Pretty much every species uses elements of nature. Bats live in caves. Does this mean caves were produced by "intelligent design"? Many types of bugs like to live under rocks. Are rocks products of "intelligent design"? There are certain creatures that survive in the deep ocean by living in the vicinity of hydrothermal vents. Are hydrothermal vents products of "intelligent design"?

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.

While fire is so destructive, it was so instrumental to man that we had no choice but to utilize it. But we needed a way to control it.

So "God" gave us water?

Uhmm...yes. I'm a believer, remember? Is this a smart question to ask?

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

Water is such a way.

As is throwing dirt on a fire...

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.

It is a gentle, everyday mineral,

Water is a mineral? Where did you go to school?

You're right. Water is not a mineral. The word meant to be used here was 'substance.' It was a mix up as I was writing the text at 3 am when I was very tired. To all: please globally replace the word mineral in my post with substance.

and yet it so easily extinguishes such a destructive force of nature.

Ever try extinguishing a grease fire or a chemical fire with water? How about an oil fire?

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.)

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.

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.

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.

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.

Some medicines today are still manufactured using plants or herbs, at least in part. Banana skins alone have a powerful antioxidant and strong healing benefits. Looking at this from an angle open to intelligent design, you can see how someone might be looking out for us.

Someone is "looking out for us" because we have discovered how to use certain plants to remedy some ailments? Then explain to me why this intelligent being gave us edible mushrooms and deadly poisonous mushrooms, and made it very difficult to tell them apart.

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.

Jet Stream: The jet stream is a complex maze in the ocean.

The jet stream is in the OCEAN? Your high school called. They want their diploma back.

Thor is correct. I meant to say ocean current, such as the Gulf Stream, and mixed it all up writing late night. We all mix up words and terms sometimes, so let's not be as condescending as Thor was. To all: Please substitute 'jet stream' in my post with 'ocean current.'

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.

Are you related to Ray Comfort? And you do realize that the bananas we have today are the result of human cultivation? The bananas that existed a few hundred years ago look nothing like the banana you get in the grocery store.

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.

[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.

[Thor]

I personally applaud Thor for taking AngelThMan's text, dismantling it, and exposing it for the steaming pile it is. Bravo, good sir.

Thank you for the kind words! I am humbled!

Just when the arguments can't get any worse than "Humans can't synthesize life yet therefore God exists", he comes back with a gem like "Humans can control fire therefore God exists".

This argument is further weakened when you consider that sometimes man CAN'T control fire! How many people are killed and how many homes are destroyed every year because fire gets out of control?

I'm gong to postulate what's next.

"Humans can cook therefore God exists"
"Humans can drive cars therefore God exists"
"Humans can tell stories therefore God exists"

How about "Humans can build things, therefore God exists."
"Humans can make glass, therefore God exists."
"Humans can control animals, therefore God exists."

There's literally no end to the crap you can come up with!

[Minimalist]

I personally applaud Thor for taking AngelThMan's text

Seems like a lot of work to go through for a moron who thinks the bible is true. No amount of effort will dissuade him from believing (without evidence) that pile of shit.

[quiet_samurai]

There is no evidence of God exhisting. Even among your examples. The whole point of having faith in something is to beilieve in it without proof or evidence. Because it would then cease to be faith and become knowledge. The whole point behind a religion (Christianity, Judaism, Islam for arguments sake) is to be faithful in it, not knowledgable. Giving yourself unto God without proof is what is asked. Believing in a God is different then knowing.

Same with disproving, or providing evidence there isn't a God. Mostly because you can't disprove something that does not exhist int he first place. I can't disprove Bigfoot or Zeus, but that doesn't mean that they exhist. But let's just say that someone did provide evidene that disproved Gods exhistance, that would completely unravel his/her said plan and go right back to the faith argument I made, and if that was the case, then he/she is not infallable. If a mere human could disprove God's intent and undermine him/her successfully.... then that entity isn't God anyways, and we have nothing to worry about.

[Thor]

I personally applaud Thor for taking AngelThMan's text

Seems like a lot of work to go through for a moron who thinks the bible is true. No amount of effort will dissuade him from believing (without evidence) that pile of shit.

You're right... it was a lot of work. But I can't let someone drop a load of bullshit without challenging it. I'm probably not going to change the mind of the true believer, but I'm at least going to let him (or her) know that there is no rational basis for what they believe.

---

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.

Uh, yeah, I do know what "exclusive" means. And, as I pointed out, man does not EXCLUSIVELY use fire. There are certain plants that need fire to reproduce. Or did you not read that in my earlier post?

So "God" gave us water?

Uhmm...yes. I'm a believer, remember? Is this a smart question to ask?

So you believe that your loving deity gave us water. Then answer this... did your "loving" deity also give us plague, malaria, influenza, smallpox, diptheria, tuberculosis, internal parasites, ticks, mosquitos, lice and poisonous snakes?

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

And as Tav pointed out, depending on the type of fire, water can make the fire WORSE.

As is throwing dirt on a fire...

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.

Again, as Tav mentioned, the most powerful combatant of fire is to remove air by smothering the fire. If what you believe is true, you'd think "God" would have made it easier to perform this task.

You're right. Water is not a mineral. The word meant to be used here was 'substance.' It was a mix up as I was writing the text at 3 am when I was very tired.

Maybe you shouldn't be posting things if you're so tired and prone to making simple mistakes.

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.

And you miss the point. The point is that you cannot extinguish an oil fire with water! Have you ever seen anyone try to put out a burning oil well with water? IT DOESN'T WORK!

But the best weapon is still water.

No, the best weapon is to deny the fire oxygen.

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

And, again, as Tav pointed out, water does not extinguish a fire "every time".

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.

No, I'm pointing out the faultiness of your logic.

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.

Yes, water is necessary for us to survive. Can't say that about smoke, can we?

The inhalation of smoke in enclosed environments can be fatal,

"Enclosed environments"? So you think no one has ever died of smoke inhalation OUTDOORS?

but now you're talking about fires that have raged out of control,

Not true at all. People die in their sleep of smoke inhalation well before the fire has gotten out of control. Again, this is just a terrific "warning system". Would anyone design a burglar alarm that causes a shotgun to shoot them in the head if someone tries to break into their house?

or situations in which people have been trapped or foolishly remained indoors too long, etc.

"Foolishly remained indoors"? Like when they're SLEEPING?

But all this is entirely a different issue.

Yes, it is. But I can understand why you'd try to obfuscate....

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.

And did these face masks drop out of the sky? What does this have to do with my point?

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.

Yeah, that red glow in the distance, the sound of crackling underbrush and all the animals fleeing aren't enough of a warning. Your briliiant deity decided to throw smoke into the equation! Something that causes far more harm than good. If what you say is true, then I would say your deity is a retard.

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?

And yet you have failed to show me any plants that cure any of the diseases I have mentioned.

You also have to consider that not all the medicinal benefits of plants and herbs have been discovered.

No shit. But why doesn't your loving deity simply tell us what plants will cure what diseases? Why do we have to take many years of research to develop something that he could point out to us in a second? In the meantime, people suffer and die.

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.

There's no reason why shrimp should be so delicious when eaten by man. You think "God" made them specifically for us to eat?

Looking at this from an angle open to intelligent design, you can see how someone might be looking out for us.

Not at all. Because if someone were "looking out for us" he would have made it so we DON'T NEED antioxidants, herbs or medicines. He also would not have created poisonous plants, deadly insects, scorpions, spiders, allergies, asthma, fatty foods or male pattern baldness.

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.

Oh, gee.... you mean I'll find out after I'm dead?

Are you related to Ray Comfort? And you do realize that the bananas we have today are the result of human cultivation? The bananas that existed a few hundred years ago look nothing like the banana you get in the grocery store.

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.

By this "logic" you can credit "God" with absolutely anything! "God" produced the airplane! "God" produced the automobile! "God" produced the space shuttle! "God" produced the nuclear power plant! "God" is responsible for open heart surgery! Of course, if you're going to use this as your argument, then "God" is also responsible for child pornography, heroin, cocaine, torture devices, concentration camps and Pauly Shore movies.

[tavarish]

"Would anyone design a burglar alarm that causes a shotgun to shoot them in the head if someone tries to break into their house?"

[Ace Otana]

but water is the most powerful combatant of fire.

No it fucking isn't. Using water to put out certain fires can make things terribly worse!




If you really think water is the best way to put out a fire then try it on an oil fire! Though I strongly advise that you stand well back.
You can kill fires by taking away it's heat, fuel or oxygen. The most effective is taking away the air. Trying to take away the heat is often harder and sometimes makes things worse. Taking away it's fuel is almost impossible. So we are left with smothering it. Water is NOT the most effective way to kill fires.

You really need to educate yourself on fire safety.

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.

Wrong yet again. Smoke has killed more people than fire has. Even in open areas.
When you sleep during the night, smoke can keep you from waking up and slowly you begin to die. You'd think you would wake up to the smell, but you don't.




You are an idiot.

[downbeatplumb]

"Would anyone design a burglar alarm that causes a shotgun to shoot them in the head if someone tries to break into their house?"

Americans.