What's the lamest defence of Theism you've ever heard?

[robvalue]

Indeed.

I would also fully expect other life forms to have arisen and died out, all over the universe, in the past.

[LadyForCamus]

The cell is more complex than the circuit board on the asteroid. It was an analogy. We don't know how it could have gotten there. There is only ONE cause that is so far sufficient to lead to the phenomena that are observed in the cell. That is intelligence. But this answer is unacceptable, and according to you anyone who reasons this way is a caveman. 

For intelligence to be even viable as an alternative, you need evidence that an intelligence capable of filling that role existed in the first place. When people study stone tool making technology, they do so within the bounds of established hypotheses as to the existence of a suitable intelligence in the area in question at the right time. If we found stone tools in a 10,000 year old layer of antarctic soil, then design would not be a reasonable hypothesis as there was no designer around at the time. You need to provide some evidence of a suitable designer before the design hypothesis becomes realistic. You have not done so, aside from the fine tuning argument, which is inconclusive at best; we don't know why the parameters of the universe are what they are, and neither do you.

Second, evolution provides a naturalistic explanation for the development of intelligence. So claiming that it "looks like an intelligence was involved" gets you nothing as intelligence itself may be the result of natural processes. (Unless you're proposing that the designer evolved naturally, which you're not.) You're making an argument by analogy to human design without realizing that this very appeal to human intelligence may undermine your entire argument about the nature of the designer. Is it possible that your designer evolved to the point of having the capabilities of intelligence and technology necessary for designing life? If not, then you are proceeding from a false analogy because it is possible that human intelligence evolved. You are sneaking in the assumption that intelligence is not the result of natural processes into the basement of your argument. The fact that intelligence and its evolution may be a natural process unravels your entire argument.

What a good point, Jor. So, this leaves AAA with two directions he can take his hypothesis:

1. This creator's super-intelligence did in fact evolve:

And, like you said, his argument's foundation collapses into itself at this point. It also leaves him with the task of explaining the mechanism by which his creator evolved, and how he came into existence in the first place. Backwards through the infinite regress tunnel we go, weeee!

2. This creator's intelligence didn't evolve:

He popped into existence from nothing, fully-loaded with a super intelligence capable of creating and directing all life on earth. Well, if this isn't just the most delicious example of special pleading I've ever seen...

Hmmm...Looks like you got some 'splaining to do, triple A!

[LadyForCamus]

Probably many of you have seen this before, but I thought it'd be worth posting for anyone who maybe hasn't. Hehe.

http://youtu.be/s6AdEDm2mLQ

[FebruaryOfReason]

It's not perfect (it literally couldn't be) but the design is pretty apparent when you look at how the cell works.

Your god is supposed to be perfect. It works like this: either your god is perfect, and a dithering dick for creating imperfect life, or he doesn't exist at all. Actually, there is only one option, because life clearly isn't perfect and there is no evidence of any design. This makes a perfect god impossible, even if there was any sort of initial designer. You cannot make anything imperfect and still be perfect yourself, and neither can your god. It is you, the theists who claim that your god cannot do evil, and doesn't make mistakes, so get consistent with your claims if you're going to make them and stop making excuses which blame said god's imperfect creatures for all the shit which he allowed to happen. Why, by the way does shit exist when life is supposedly so fucking perfect? Why in fallacious fuck do you exist, loser who you are to come around where you know you don't belong, knowing that you will achieve nothing but to annoy those who you have willfully decided to disagree with, all the time pounding your chest and sniggering? Oh, right, that's just what any perfect prince of a perfect god would always do! Why then did even your apostle Paul show the good sense to take off and never come back when they made it clear they just weren't interested in what he had to sell?

The world in which we live is in no way perfect at all, ∴ your god fucked up stupendously, if he created any life here at all. There is no legitimate blame on anybody for "sin" because a perfect god should have known better than to allow what he did - he could not and would not have decided on allowing "free will", such a decision would in itself be a weakness. More obvious problems which your creationist mental gymnastics bends around and sidesteps: there can't be anything which your god's said creation can do which would ever annoy a perfect god, because goddammit, he's perfect - well, that's what he's said to be! ∴ your god doesn't exist, and you are just an asshole who wants to wield god-like power over other people - on that, no thank you and feel free to go fuck yourself into the next dimension and out of sight.

Magnificent. Simply magnificent.

[Cyberman]

Actually the time frame available after big bang for advanced life forms such as ours to have formed isnt that far fetched, it wouldve been if this was an experiment conducted in a lab but its not. When you consider the sheer size of the universe - these reactions couldve been happening all accross our universe simultaneously, perhaps earth was lucky enough to have had stable stuff like cell form here or this thing got here from somewhere else, completely plausible.

That's what I mean. We can push the origin of life on this planet back a step, reasonably, but at some point we're still faced with that same abiogenesis question as here.

[Pat Mustard]

Actually, stuff don't happen because the conditions are right. Stuff happen so as to survive in a given condition(evolution). There is no right condition.

Now let me savour this rare moment...mmmmm

Absolutely correct.

We are adapted to the conditions here, for the most part* not the other way around.

*Over the course of Deep Time, life on earth has somewhat adapted the world just by its very nature. For example, the 20% or so of free oxygen in the atmosphere is impossible without a great mass of photosynthesising plant matter.

[robvalue]

Hmm, well this formula seems popular:

Theist: "Here's what I understand about God."

Me: "Here's why that makes no sense."

Theist: "Well, God is beyond our understanding."

Me: "Thought so."

[Living in Death]

"Want proof? Just look around you!"

[ErGingerbreadMandude]

"Want proof? Just look around you!"

OMG. If i had 10 cents everytime the no of times ive heard this..

[ignoramus]

Of course another explanation wouid be that life couldve formed(achieved its stable state) elsewhere,ie,other than earth and then somehow reached earth.. And after reaching earth was then subject to evolution ..and got to what it is today..

Pooly, As Hanky said, why does it need to come from elsewhere? Plenty of shit going on in our own primordial pool.
Maybe it did? Maybe conditions to trigger chemistry to biology were better elsewhere ...it's all conjecture.

Pool: Sure, at an abstract level that is true. I meant at a more fundamental, microscopic level. If the conditions are right for something to happen, in accordance with whatever rules apply, then it happens. It's a tautology, I'm not trying to say anything profound!

As an overall pattern, life generally "tries to survive", I agree. This is an emergent property of all these rules interacting at the fundamental level.

Good point Rob. My question is of course: Why does low level unintelligent life try to survive? Why does its dna tell it to survive at any cost?

Since when did life become precious? Philosophical question maybe, but interesting none the less.
Happy to listen to opinions which don't involve IR (infinite regress).