The flaws in Intelligent design

[Audie]

Did I say I was? I'm saying I don't buy it and explaining why not. Try putting forth a real argument.

If your source cannot possibly be wrong and your
explanations stickto the party line, you cannot
possibly be wrong. How many ways are
there to claim infallibility? If you missed one,
you still said it.

Do you think you could possibly be wrong and ToE, correct?

Real arguments?
You are presenting no real arguments. Just blind faith.
Your explanations do not include one fact contrary to
the theory of evolution. ( why would you call it "Darwinism"?)

Educated Catholics like the Pooe tend to recognize that.there
are no facts contrary to ToE., and dont wish to look foolish
showing they dont understand entropy, or claiming the Paluxy
man-tracks are real.

You want a real argument? Come up with one (1) fact contrary to
ToE.

Actually, you wont get an argument then. You will get stunned
amazement, followed by a Nobel.

Here is a challenge- give us one fact contrary to ToE,
or quit pretending. "Put up or shut up", is, I believe,
the American phrase for it.

Haha. I know you cannot do it.

 

[Forever_Catholic]

What objective evidence do you have that your god exist?

He has interacted with me, and will do the same for anyone, as I said earlier "who seeks him with a sincere heart and receptive mind."

 

[Audie]

Creationists have failed to provide objective evidence that there is a god.

Dont pick on the creos for that. No poet, philosopher, prospector,
alchemist, deep sea diver, scientist, cop, hoary debtor or theologian
has been able to.

And if they did? Great. But totally irrelevant to ToE, auto mechanics,
calculus or dentistry.

A fact contrary to ToE is all we really ask of creos

 

[Audie]

He has interacted with me, and will do the same for anyone, as I said earlier "who seeks him with a sincere heart and receptive mind."

People say the same for Allah, and pretty much every other god, demon,
sprite etc.

Who has the truth? Only the infallible?

 

[QuestioningMind]

This conversation has exceeded what I consider to be the boundaries of the original premise. Neither Intelligent Design or Evolution are "Laws" and are merely hypothesis in my opinion.

But of course evolution is far more than just a mere hypothesis. It's long been recognized as a scientific theory, as valid as the theory of gravity or the theory that the Earth orbits the sun. Intelligent Design however will forever remain a mere hypothesis, since no one has ever found a way to test the claims of the hypothesis.

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Here is a challenge- give us one fact contrary to ToE,
or quit pretending.

Should you be telling me to put up or shut up, or should I be telling you to do that? Explain the wonders of evolution to me and back it up as the reality you believe it to be.

 

[Audie]

Oh is that how ya spell it? What if my mouth pronounces it as avatOre?

Would it be a misspell then?

No, but it would be a misspelling.

 

[Timothy Spurlin]

If you ever decide to seek God with a sincere heart and a receptive mind, then you will come to know Him as a reality. You will recognize his responses to you. You might even have a miraculous conversion experience. This sort of first-hand knowledge is definitive proof for any individual who receives it, but it cannot then be proven to others.

So your talking about a subjective experience that comes from your mind. Objective experience exist outside of the mind.
So only a true believer can experience god?

 

[Audie]

Should you be telling me to put up or shut up, or should I be telling you to do that? Explain the wonders of evolution to me and back it up as the reality you believe it to be.

Right! I ask for one fact and you ask for a library!
Turnabout is fair play, creo - style!

But it will do, like your tacit claim of infallibility,
as a concession that ya dont have diddly-squat!

(Did I get my idiom correct?)

You cannot come up with datum point
one. Why are you even here?

 

[Timothy Spurlin]

Darwinism is contrary to Catholic teaching, but the Church does not prohibit Catholics from believing that God has used some form of (unspecified) evolutionary process(es) in creation. I don't.
The Church is infallible in matters of faith and morals, but the Pope is not infallible in his personal opinions. Pope Francis has not changed any doctrines, so I have no disagreement with him in that regard. On the other hand, I disagree with many of his personal opinions as he has stated them, particularly about evolution.

So you don't believe in evolution? Do you believe god created all life?
What objective evidence do you have for a god existing?

 

[Audie]

So your talking about a subjective experience that comes from your mind. Objective experience exist outside of the mind.
So only a true believer can experience god?

Same thing with Tilkut, The Bear God. Ya first gotta
believe!

 

[Jollybear]

No, but it would be a misspelling.

Well then i must be breaking the rules of the english language because it seams i spell based on how i hear or pronounce the word.

 

[Audie]

Well then i must be breaking the rules of the english language because it seams i spell based on how i hear or pronounce the word.

The rules of English pronunciation will allow for
"crocodile" to be pronounced as "srosodilly".

We who learned English as a second language know better
than to spell as we think something is pronouned, and vice versa.

 

[Forever_Catholic]

So your talking about a subjective experience that comes from your mind. Objective experience exist outside of the mind.
So only a true believer can experience god?

So if you have a headache, is that a subjective experience? Since no one else has felt one of your headaches, maybe they never existed.

You can experience God yourself and know His reality for yourself, but probably not by denying his existence.

 

[Audie]

So if you have a headache, is that a subjective experience? Since no one else has felt one of your headaches, maybe they never existed.

You can experience God yourself and know His reality for yourself, but probably not by denying his existence.

Hey "god" and ToE have something in common!

Ya can't understand by denying!

(Do you understand, btw, that only certsin cults feel tha
ToE and "god" are mutually exclusive?)

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Right! I ask for one fact and you ask for a library!

Yes, and what I don't feel like writing right now either.

 

[Forever_Catholic]

But it will do, like your tacit claim of infallibility,
as a concession that ya dont have diddly-squat!

(Did I get my idiom correct?)

You cannot come up with datum point
one. Why are you even here?

We've hit it off pretty well, don't you think so?

 

[Forever_Catholic]

Hey "god" and ToE have something in common!

Ya can't understand by denying!

(Do you understand, btw, that only certsin cults feel tha
ToE and "god" are mutually exclusive?)

Yes, you have said something true. "Ya can't understand by denying." But I didn't start off denying evolution. I had to study it in 7th-grade biology class. Had to pass tests.

The truths of science are entirely compatible with religious faith, but evolution as a theory and a concept is contrary to faith. In fact, that's it's main value to atheists.

 

[Cooky]

What objective evidence do you have that your god exist?

I don't need objective evidence. That's your problem, atheist.

 

[Jose Fly]

What selective breeding and adaptation cannot do is change a species beyond its parameters. It cannot turn one species into another. There is no empirical evidence that such a thing has ever happened and the fossil record offers no evidence either.

Oh for the love of.......

Did it ever occur to you to go look and see if there's ever been a documented case of the evolution of a new species before you posted the above?