Here's why Creatards might be right

[Esquilax]

how were the laws of physics and chemistry developed what developed them ?

If there comes a point where we don't currently know, or I don't know personally, are you going to claim that this gives your position any additional credence?

[jenny1972]

We don't have those structures or cells.  That's not the way we went. 

why isnt it the way we went ? what determined in the beginning that we would not be using photosynthesis as plants do what caused us to be different ?

[The Grand Nudger]

I don't think that anything determined that "in the beginning" and it certainly didn't happen "in the beginning"...we're fairly recent.  Rewind the clock, and I'd be surprised to see things play out the same way.  Perhaps we would get autotrophism and plants would get soul crushing boot stomping predatory mobility? Mutations caused us to be different. That's what they do. That's what it means, to mutate. To change.

[jenny1972]

actually it doesnt because a human being has to play the game and create things using intelligence so it supports my position not yours . just like the computer program itself was developed by an intelligent programmer

LOL, no...you don't have to "play"...you just hit the button and watch.  The computer creates all the fun on the screen, starting from very simple rules...look, the explanation for how it works is actually in the game.  You think that it being a computer program means something that it doesn't.

Simple rules and no interaction from any exterior agent yields complex and organized behaviors out of proportion to those rules and the initial condition.  Sorry, again, this has been proven.  It's a fact.  I put it in front of you for you to witness with your very own eyes.  You can no longer claim that you havent seen unintelligent processes create complex or organized this and thats, unless you add the caveat "because I didn't want to see it".  

If you need to argue against facts to defend your beliefs, you're in trouble.

its just a computer program that was designed by an intelligent being to do that . if the computer programmer didnt create that computer program then it wouldnt exist

[The Grand Nudger]

Look, I'm not going to debate with you what I needn't debate.  You have the program, you can figure it out for yourself.  You've very literally been handed the knowledge, and what you do with it is your own business. Either you can accept a fact and incorporate it into your beliefs or you can't - that has little to do with me.

Your god is, at the very least, not as small as you thought he was. Apparently, if he exists, he can go completely hands off. Feel free to argue against facts till you're blue in the face, make your god as small as you need him to be to feel comfortable?

[jenny1972]

i see a lot of proof of intelligent design and you dont see any thats fine , moving on , so then you believe that the various different complex systems just developed based on random chance ?

No, because "random" is a misleading representation of what actually happens. Every development in the history of the universe happened within the context of the universe itself, both in what it is, and its history. A system like photosynthesis didn't just develop randomly, it developed at least partially in reaction to the world around it; it was allowed to develop and propagate because if conferred an advantage because it was an energy efficient way to gain sustenance, for example. In a world where photosynthesis would be harmful to the organisms that possessed it, we would have gotten a very different set up, because dead organisms do not allow their traits to develop. In a world without a sun, we would never have gotten it at all, most likely.

These things are not random. They are unguided, but they happen within a set of parameters, which makes all the difference. Every system is scaffolded by the other systems around it and every small change that happened previously within the system. It's like rolling dice: the outcome is unguided and perhaps unpredictable, but it isn't truly random because there are constraints on the results. You'll never get a number seven on your standard six sided dice, obviously, but that's what you'd expect within a random system, rather than a system that contains a number of unguided elements.

what developed these constraints ?

[The Grand Nudger]

At least we've made it to what, now, rather than who.  Watch out, you're becoming an atheist almost by osmosis Jen.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Too simple, it turns out.  At the point of singularity, all the laws of physics break down.  I suggest you go read up on Planck time.

Planck time - Done.

Great. Now read up on the physics of singularities.

http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

[jenny1972]

ok what do you think started it to begin with ?

I'm sorry....are you asking the same question again?  Did you have some problem with my last answer?  Define "it"?

@Rocket  Glider gun, pft...Breeder master race, lol!

you didnt say what you believe started it (photosynthesis) to begin with , how did the DNA of the plant develop the code so that the plant had the ability to develop and use photosynthesis ?

[The Grand Nudger]

Yeah, I did.  Photo-reactive chemicals and structures contained within living things started photosynthesis. Plants got the dna from a symbiosis between protists and bacteria (before there were plants, mind=blown, eh?). None of this, btw...an issue of any belief of mine. I'm relating to you our best reconstruction of events as fact presents it. How many times do I have to say something before you decide to hear it? I bet, if I'd said "god is real", you'd have heard it seconds before I said it, miraculously.

.................?