Unintelligent Design

[Robert.Evans]

I'm not sure how I could explain it more clearly.

I don’t need to know what NS is, I know.
Forgive me, from your responses it appeared you did not.

So now I am asking you what this “natural” is. Where does it come from?
hmmmm, not sure I understand. Are you looking for this?
big bang - inflation - cooling - coaslesce of matter into larger masses - stars - planets - earth

For you to say it is “natural” is no different than someone else sayin, “God did it.” Now you are saying that, “Natural did it.”
Could you explain what you mean by "God"?

Do you understand yet?
Why the hostile tone? If you'd like to proceed in that way I'm fine with it, I just don't understand why you are started off with such a patronizing tone.


Ultimately though, yes there was 'luck' involved, luck in terms of which mutations arose, luck in terms of an asteroid wiping the dinosaurs out, luck in our particular planet being in the goldilocks zone, etc.
Luck, assuming one doesn't accept determinism of course.

But it isn't luck in the sense of an ape suddenly giving birth to a human because a whole pile of mutations took place at once.

You are a new member, which I missed. Welcome.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Luck and intelligence aren't mutually exclusive. Have you ever played cards?

Yes I have played cards. Explain please.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Yes I have played cards. Explain please.

Both luck and intelligence are involved in playing cards, the point being that they are not mutually exclusive. So your dichotomy is false.

Clearly there is a sort of intelligence or instinct involved in evolution, ie adaptation and natural selection. Chance also plays a part.

If we talking instead about how and why our universe came into being, then it remains a big fat question mark. There are numerous possibilities, many of which we probably haven't even thought of yet. Words like "luck" and "intelligence" are simply not up to the task of speculating about something which may well be unimaginable or inconceivable from our current limited knowledge and understanding. Believe what you wish to believe, but you might as well admit that you are as clueless as the rest of us on this question.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Both luck and intelligence are involved in playing cards, the point being that they are not mutually exclusive. So your dichotomy is false.

But we are not speaking about playing cards< an act that can now be played because everything exists in the first place. I want to know what could create a universe if there is no intelligence involved.

Clearly there is a sort of intelligence or instinct involved in evolution, ie adaptation and natural selection. Chance also plays a part.


If we talking instead about how and why our universe came into being, then it remains a big fat question mark. There are numerous possibilities, many of which we probably haven't even thought of yet. Words like "luck" and "intelligence" are simply not up to the task of speculating about something which may well be unimaginable or inconceivable from our current limited knowledge and understanding.

Sounds a little like God Spiney.

Believe what you wish to believe, but you might as well admit that you are as clueless as the rest of us on this question.

No, but you may believe what you want to believe also I guess.


I do not think it is too difficult a concept to understand. If there is no such thing as intelligence, and we see intelligence as steering things (if you like) then it must be luck, randomness, blind chance. I think the odds of the universe working as they do are horrendous so how can anyone accept it? I would have though the default answer would be intelligence for that reason alone. Yet it appears there are some that will not accept it just because we can’t see invisible consciousness.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Sounds a little like God Spiney.

So God is a big fat question mark?

The problem I see is that you're starting with a belief and conviction that God exists, and then trying to find ways to justify or support that belief. Maybe He does, maybe He doesn't, but discussions on a forum like this are unlikely to resolve any doubts you may have. And if you haven't got any doubts then presumably you are just prostelysing, in which case you must expect to be vigorously challenged.

 

[MARCELLO]

hahahahahha ! wonderful topic!

Very unintelligent design that makes girls born with a penis.

Very unintelligent design that makes babies without arms or legs.

Very unintelligent design that created dark skin for what even my dogs are racist against them.

Flowers? Rivers? God,I tell you,go and play in water.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I find time and again that the claimed "design flaws" in people and animals are found to be perfect designs not fully understood, much like the so-called vestigial organs once thought useless and routinely removed; or the so-called junk DNA found not to be junk after all.

That's simply not true. There are all sorts of redundancies and poor designs in the natural world. That's no biggie unless you're a believer in a perfect God who has directly designed all creatures, of course.

 

[The Sparrow]

You are the first person to admit it in such clear terms that luck has created YOUR universe. I wonder how you accept that, but I congratulate you for it.

This energy, if I can use that term for want of a better one, just changes into other stuff does it, and then eventually creates a universe. All the necessary attributes of creation are there waiting to be exploited are they? And you, as an atheist, accept it as being “natural” and that explains it. Is that right?

Do you not see any problems with that?

It doesn’t really matter about evolution and natural selection when you have to have so much luck and blind chance in the first place to get to a stage where the “natural” has some form of AI to make non-randomness appear from randomness.


In other words, either “Luckdidit” or “Naturaldidit”. Don’t you think that is more absurd than saying there was intelligence involved? I would like you to think about it before you come back with a usual atheist pat reply.

You are the first person to admit it in such clear terms that luck has created YOUR universe.
What do you mean MY universe, are you proposing some strange multiverse theory?

I wonder how you accept that
ummm, because the evidence points there. I may not be comfortable with the conclusion, but that doesn't impact it's veracity.

All the necessary attributes of creation are there waiting to be exploited are they?
On earth, yes. On Venus, not so much, nor Jupiter for example.

Do you not see any problems with that?
Considerably less than the problems with ID.

...to get to a stage where the “natural” has some form of AI..
Who said there is any intelligence behind natural selection? I did not.

Don’t you think that is more absurd than saying there was intelligence involved?
Nope. Not when you consider the billions of galaxies, the billions of stars within them, the billions of planets around them, and so far the relative rarity of having things just perfectly right for live to arise and evolve, and even then, having humans exist only after billions of years of evolution.

I would like you to think about it before you come back with a usual atheist pat reply
Again with personal attacks. That's not very Christian behavior.

Since I have answered your questions, perhaps you could answer one of mine.
Why do you think there is no life on the moon, or on Mercury?

 

[dust1n]

You are the first person to admit it in such clear terms that luck has created YOUR universe.
What do you mean MY universe, are you proposing some strange multiverse theory?

You should get familiar with the quote function. It will inform people when you comment on what they say.

 

[Robert.Evans]

So God is a big fat question mark?

The problem I see is that you're starting with a belief and conviction that God exists, and then trying to find ways to justify or support that belief. Maybe He does, maybe He doesn't, but discussions on a forum like this are unlikely to resolve any doubts you may have. And if you haven't got any doubts then presumably you are just prostelysing, in which case you must expect to be vigorously challenged.

We all start from a place of defending what we believe, so what. You think you say that so you're right?

 

[Robert.Evans]

You are the first person to admit it in such clear terms that luck has created YOUR universe.

What do you mean MY universe, are you proposing some strange multiverse theory?


I wonder how you accept that

ummm, because the evidence points there. I may not be comfortable with the conclusion, but that doesn't impact it's veracity.

Funny. I would say the evidence points elsewhere.

All the necessary attributes of creation are there waiting to be exploited are they?

On earth, yes. On Venus, not so much, nor Jupiter for example.


Do you not see any problems with that?

Considerably less than the problems with ID.

Who mentioned ID? I am speaking about some form of Intelligence. I think a lot of atheists start with pre-conceived ideas about God and theology and come up with the wrong answers because of it. I am not surprised about this.

...to get to a stage where the “natural” has some form of AI..

Who said there is any intelligence behind natural selection? I did not.

Natural selection is a form of AI. You have to have a way of forming non-randomness from randomness.

Don’t you think that is more absurd than saying there was intelligence involved?

Nope. Not when you consider the billions of galaxies, the billions of stars within them, the billions of planets around them, and so far the relative rarity of having things just perfectly right for live to arise and evolve, and even then, having humans exist only after billions of years of evolution.

Doesn’t stack up with the odds of the universe, and that is science speaking. Even the odds of the big bang are ridiculous and should give one reason to pause.

I would like you to think about it before you come back with a usual atheist pat reply

Again with personal attacks. That's not very Christian behavior.

I am not a Christian. That is not a personal attack. It is based on experience. I think perhaps you are too sensitive.

Since I have answered your questions, perhaps you could answer one of mine.

Why do you think there is no life on the moon, or on Mercury?

If we are talking in physical terms, ask science. They are not in the goldilocks zone. So what? You fail to see the ASK that you have in believing that a universe just pops up with everything it needs to make life, and yet you yourself say that it is “luck”. Sometimes I think the problem is too great for most to realise it.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

You think you say that so you're right?

That's for you to work out. It really doesn't matter to me whether or not God exists, but it clearly matters to you.

 

[Robert.Evans]

That's for you to work out. It really doesn't matter to me whether or not God exists, but it clearly matters to you.

It matters to you. It doesn't matter to me as I know he does.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

It doesn't matter to me as I know he does.

So are you trying to convince the rest of us? That might take a while.

 

[The Sparrow]

Funny. I would say the evidence points elsewhere.

Yes, I can see that. I could understand that viewpoint a few thousand years ago, when they thought the sky was a dome and the earth was the centre of everything, not so much now.

Who mentioned ID? I am speaking about some form of Intelligence. I think a lot of atheists start with pre-conceived ideas about God and theology and come up with the wrong answers because of it. I am not surprised about this.

Natural selection is a form of AI. You have to have a way of forming non-randomness from randomness.

ummm, no. There is nothing in natural selection that has anything to do with artificial intelligence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence

Doesn’t stack up with the odds of the universe, and that is science speaking. Even the odds of the big bang are ridiculous and should give one reason to pause.

Please explain how you come up with these 'odds'

I am not a Christian. That is not a personal attack. It is based on experience. I think perhaps you are too sensitive.

No, you're just being rude.

If we are talking in physical terms, ask science.

I have, and it shows that ID is nonsense.

They are not in the goldilocks zone. So what?

So, the environment has something to do with if and how life arises and develops. Thank you for that.

You fail to see the ASK that you have in believing that a universe just pops up with everything it needs to make life

Actually the overwhelming majority of the universe is in fact lacking 'everything it needs to make life'. Even within our solar system it appears to be quite rare in terms of location, and time.

, and yet you yourself say that it is “luck”. Sometimes I think the problem is too great for most to realise it.

Your incredulity does not count as evidence.

 

[Robert.Evans]

So are you trying to convince the rest of us? That might take a while.

I wonder why people like you who don't believe spend so much time disucssing it and arguing about it. Any answers to that?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I wonder why people like you who don't believe spend so much time disucssing it and arguing about it. Any answers to that?

It's just to keep you amused.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Yes, I can see that. I could understand that viewpoint a few thousand years ago, when they thought the sky was a dome and the earth was the centre of everything, not so much now.


ummm, no. There is nothing in natural selection that has anything to do with artificial intelligence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence



Please explain how you come up with these 'odds'



No, you're just being rude.


I have, and it shows that ID is nonsense.


So, the environment has something to do with if and how life arises and develops. Thank you for that.


Actually the overwhelming majority of the universe is in fact lacking 'everything it needs to make life'. Even within our solar system it appears to be quite rare in terms of location, and time.


Your incredulity does not count as evidence.

Hmmm.... well I don't see anything worth answering there. Your comments are pretty standard and you missed most of my points I feel.

 

[Robert.Evans]

That's for you to work out. It really doesn't matter to me whether or not God exists, but it clearly matters to you.

Yet you believe in a fat guy who sits under a tree? What is this New Heart Sutra? Why did you not put that in the open subject where you to could be ridiculed like you do us?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Yet you believe in a fat guy who sits under a tree? What is this New Heart Sutra? Why did you not put that in the open subject where you to could be ridiculed like you do us?

How petty of you. Ridicule Buddhism all you like, I really don't care. Though I doubt you understand it sufficiently well to do an effective job.

I really don't get it. You come on a forum and proselytize interminably about theism, then whinge when people challenge your cliched theology and vague claims about "spiritual discernment". Oh well.