Author Topic: The Probability of the Big Bang  (Read 79088 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #522 on: March 29, 2012, 05:26:02 PM »

Yes.

My examples "weren't" evidence of design?

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5185
  • Darwins +106/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #523 on: March 29, 2012, 05:27:05 PM »
Do I need to? ... What would evidence for a designer look like to you? 

Some things I'd want -

Where are the prototype plans for the design?
Where is the materials list?
Where is the software source code?
What was used to create the design?
Why did the designer create the design - why did the designer need to create the design?

Finally -

Where is the designer?
Seriously, you guys are the meanest people I have ever met.  I hope you are happy and feel really good about yourself. 

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #524 on: March 29, 2012, 05:27:53 PM »
Dismissing absurdities? 

A rejection from personal incredulity is not a refutation, it is a fallacy.

Why do you think dismissing something out of hand is a credible argument?

Because I dismissed ZERO proof of anything.  I questioned the rationale of the idea.  Upper extremities turning into perfect flight?  That's not absurd?  I asked for a step by step of how this happened, to try to get you to think about it, visualize the sequence of events that this played out.  And it still makes sense to you?

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #525 on: March 29, 2012, 05:28:56 PM »

Some things I'd want -

Where are the prototype plans for the design?
Where is the materials list?
Where is the software source code?
What was used to create the design?
Why did the designer create the design - why did the designer need to create the design?

Finally -

Where is the designer?

The actual "design" isn't on your list?  Oh my...

Offline Ambassador Pony

  • You keep what you kill.
  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 6861
  • Darwins +72/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • illuminatus
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #526 on: March 29, 2012, 05:29:12 PM »
You can destroy every argument she makes, point out every falsheood she has swallowed whole, but you cannot defeat her.

Ignorance persists. It is a constant of the universe, at least as long as humanity survives. I am in awe of it.
You believe evolution and there is no evidence for that. Where is the fossil record of a half man half ape. I've only ever heard about it in reading.

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #527 on: March 29, 2012, 05:29:29 PM »

My examples "weren't" evidence of design?

As was asked, what would something not designed look like? If you can't answer that then how would you know it was designed or not?
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5185
  • Darwins +106/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #528 on: March 29, 2012, 05:30:07 PM »
The actual "design" isn't on your list?  Oh my...

Can you provide what I asked for?
Seriously, you guys are the meanest people I have ever met.  I hope you are happy and feel really good about yourself. 

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +107/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #529 on: March 29, 2012, 05:30:50 PM »
A rejection from personal incredulity is not a refutation, it is a fallacy.

Why do you think dismissing something out of hand is a credible argument?

Because I dismissed ZERO proof of anything.

Yes you did.

Quote
I questioned the rationale of the idea.  Upper extremities turning into perfect flight?

This is not questioning the rationale of an idea, this is an incredulous statement, delivered upon a loaded question that offers no qualification as to what you would find acceptable much less not acceptable.  Just like you offer no qualification capable of distinguishing design from not design.  You are just dismissing out of hand anything you wish based on how mockingly you can ask a pointless question.

So again:

A rejection from personal incredulity is not a refutation, it is a fallacy.

Why do you think dismissing something out of hand is a credible argument?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline Azdgari

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 14105
  • Darwins +472/-40
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #530 on: March 29, 2012, 05:33:14 PM »
As was asked, what would something not designed look like? If you can't answer that then how would you know it was designed or not?

For reference, rockv12:

Rockv12, what does an undesigned object look like?

Is there anything in the universe that would qualify to you as undesigned?
I always say what I mean. But sometimes I'm a sarcastic prick whose tone can't be properly communicated via text.

Offline wright

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3163
  • Darwins +190/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #531 on: March 29, 2012, 05:34:12 PM »
Order does not come from disorder.  That's a fact. 

Rocky, that is absurd. Is a drop of water ordered? What about a snowflake? Order arises from disorder constantly in nature, even in nonliving materials.

Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline caveat_imperator

  • Undergraduate
  • ***
  • Posts: 199
  • Darwins +6/-0
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #532 on: March 29, 2012, 05:35:37 PM »
A rejection from personal incredulity is not a refutation, it is a fallacy.

Why do you think dismissing something out of hand is a credible argument?

Because I dismissed ZERO proof of anything.

Yes you did.

rockv just walks into them, doesn't he? :laugh:
"In the end theologians are jealous of science, for they are aware that it has greater authority than do their own ways of finding “truth”: dogma, authority, and revelation. Science does find truth, faith does not. " - Jerry Coyne

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5185
  • Darwins +106/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #533 on: March 29, 2012, 05:39:37 PM »
What isn't designed?

Rockv12 would say anything that doesn't perform an intended function isn't designed. Since all of god's creation - even a rock - performs it's intended function, it's all designed.

See how it works?
Seriously, you guys are the meanest people I have ever met.  I hope you are happy and feel really good about yourself. 

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #534 on: March 29, 2012, 05:48:31 PM »
Order does not come from disorder.  That's a fact. 

Rocky, that is absurd. Is a drop of water ordered? What about a snowflake? Order arises from disorder constantly in nature, even in nonliving materials.

Order and purpose.  Of course, wind can blow sand dunes into a circular, orderly shape.  But order/design/purpose does NOT come from disorder.  Have we ever seen a snowflake produce anything purposefully and work towards a purpose? 

Actually a snowflake is a great example of God's design.  The manufacturer of snowflakes is designed..... the science behind it is the design!! 

Offline Tero

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 768
  • Darwins +22/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #535 on: March 29, 2012, 05:59:49 PM »
Rock, What do you do for a living?

I'm a garbage man.  No, I have a Masters of Science degree in Speech-Language Pathology and I work in the medical field.   If you must know.
Not completely unlikely. Many people in medicine do not know zoology or even biochemistry very well.

Offline wright

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3163
  • Darwins +190/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #536 on: March 29, 2012, 06:42:55 PM »

Order and purpose.  Of course, wind can blow sand dunes into a circular, orderly shape.  But order/design/purpose does NOT come from disorder.  Have we ever seen a snowflake produce anything purposefully and work towards a purpose?

No one is claiming a snowflake acts in a purposeful manner. On the other hand, you have claimed that "order does not come from disorder". Water crystals (and a number of other things) clearly contradict this. Are you willing to admit you were wrong?
 

Quote
Actually a snowflake is a great example of God's design.  The manufacturer of snowflakes is designed..... the science behind it is the design!! 

Snowflakes are lovely, I agree. Do you have evidence of the principles that allow their formation being designed? If you don't, then it's just a cute idea.

Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 7739
  • Darwins +1176/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • This space for rent
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #537 on: March 29, 2012, 06:58:08 PM »
Because I dismissed ZERO proof of anything.  I questioned the rationale of the idea.  Upper extremities turning into perfect flight?  That's not absurd?  I asked for a step by step of how this happened, to try to get you to think about it, visualize the sequence of events that this played out.  And it still makes sense to you?

How many times do we have to tell you that the fact that you can't "picture" or "visualize" something well, that the flaw is in you, not in reality. And it's not even a flaw in you. It's a flaw in your mindset. It's just that you're asking the wrong questions, coming up with the wrong answers, and then telling us we're wrong because you can't do it.

Is everything I can't visualize therefore impossible? Is that the criteria I should be using?

The world of science is looking at a body of evidence so strong that we are unable to come to any other conclusion at this time. People are still out there looking both for corroborating evidence and for brand new stuff that might change the theories. Science doesn't give a flying f**k about proof. It cares about evidence and the direction that evidence takes the story.

If we have (as we do) fossils of ancient hippo like critters who live in the water a lot and some of those critters, as per the fossil record, move on to be what we now know as hippos, and others of that group start spending more time in the water and their legs start turning fin like and their nostrils start moving higher and higher on their head and we see both the similarities and the changes, what else are we supposed to think. Especially when the fossils we define as early are ALWAYS buried deeper in the rock than the ones we define as newer. Always as in every frickin' time. How does that line up with floods and short periods of time (a few thousand years at best) and everything everywhere (not counting the bible) that says the world has been around a lot longer than what you can successfully picture.

There are all kinds of things I can't picture. I can't imagine how a bolt of lightening can travel 25 miles sideways before it hits the ground. I can't picture how so much water can come out of one storm and cause flooding. I can't picture how deep the ocean is, nor how large. I can't picture how penguins can survive an Antarctic winter. So I guess all of them are impossible, because we have no proof any of those things have happened. It may well be that god just makes a new batch of penguins every year. Except science has sort of looked at all of these things, explained them, and shown each to be a real thing. So I accept that those things are real even though I can't picture them because picturing something is not the measure of it's truth.

Order and purpose.  Of course, wind can blow sand dunes into a circular, orderly shape.  But order/design/purpose does NOT come from disorder.  Have we ever seen a snowflake produce anything purposefully and work towards a purpose? 

Actually a snowflake is a great example of God's design.  The manufacturer of snowflakes is designed..... the science behind it is the design!! 

Purpose? Purpose is for religion. And just as false as the story religions tell. Evolution has no purpose. In hindsight, we can see all sorts of things going on in evolution, but it has no purpose. 

The current set of species are all a byproduct of the process, not the reason for it. Unless everything dies, evolution is going to slowly change the structure of most every living organism from what it was before. But not for a purpose. It just happens because that's the way the process works.

There was no purpose for birds developing wings. Flight was a byproduct of various changes that took place over time. Flight wasn't even mandatory. Many a flightless bird evolved, or devolved, because it didn't need flight to survive. The 12 foot tall Moa in New Zealand evolved to be huge because the environment in which it lived was condusive to being huge. No predators, lots of food, mild climate. Other much smaller flightless birds, like the kiwi, evolved there too. Again, no predators of any note and small birds are able to eat smaller grubs than 12 foot monsters. So there was a niche for them to inhabit too.

Most evolutionary changes did not work. Some worked for awhile, but when major changes in climate or other factors appeared, many species couldn't make it. And you keep forgetting about time. How long milliions and millions of years is. I can't picture it either, but we have so much evidence that such spans of time happened that it is easy to fit the changes of evolution into the picture.

Not the picture in our mind. The picture painted by scientists over the years who have studied all of this stuff dilligently. Do you actually think tens of thousands of people would dedicate their whole life to lies? Put together careers and create livelihoods that depend on the accuracy of science to continue existing? Can you picture that many people putting all their eggs in one basket of lies? I don't think so.

It's fine if you can't picture your life without god. Without jesus. But don't think that the same process that you use to convince yourself that one thing is true will also work to convince us that things that have evidence are not true. If all you have to show for your beliefs is one book full of words, while the world of science has evidence galore about anything it claims, you might give thought to picking another opponent. Perhaps one that can't smell the truth, or taste it. Your "picture" thing might work there.



What I lack in sophistication I make up for with other shortcomings.

Offline Omen

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5955
  • Darwins +107/-15
  • One of the fucking bad guys; not friendly, tiger!
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #538 on: March 29, 2012, 06:59:39 PM »
Rock, are you on anti-psychotic medication?
"Religious faith is the antithesis to knowledge, it is the opposition to education, and it has to act in animosity against the free exchange of ideas.  Why? Because those things are what cause harm to a religions place in society most." - Me

Offline jaimehlers

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 8664
  • Darwins +1094/-26
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #539 on: March 29, 2012, 08:22:35 PM »
Do I need to?  If you can't see design in this world or living things then it's useless.
Yes.  And you have to be able to back it up, not just repeatedly say, "If you can't see design in X, then I don't know what to say."

Quote from: rockv12
What would evidence for a designer look like to you?  It would look like a design to me.
Since you seem to think you know best, perhaps you could define precisely what a design is.  Saying, "something looks like a design" doesn't cut it, and if you actually understood this, I wouldn't have to explain it to you.

Quote from: rockv12
Gee, where's a design?  Oh, my hands/fingers typing on the keyboard.  Design!  Oh, my eyes placed a few inches apart in front of my face to look forward at this screen.  Design!  Oh, my ears to capture sound and filter it into my tympanic membrane and amplify sound and transfer it to the cochlea where it transfers it into electronic signals to travel to the brain for interpretation!!! Wow...Design!!!
I've written computer programs and web pages.  I know what something intentionally designed looks like, and none of those things - not your hands typing on the keyboard, not your eyes seeing the monitor, not your ears hearing the sounds of you using the computer - appear to be designed to me.  Our hands weren't "designed" to type on a computer, humans designed keyboards so that our hands could use them effectively.  Our eyes weren't "designed" to look at a monitor, humans designed monitors so that our eyes could effectively interpret the information on them.  Our ears weren't "designed" to hear the sounds of a computer, the computer was designed to make sounds that our ears could make sense of.

The keyboard, the monitor, the speakers, all of those things were designed and can be shown to be designed in a way that is unambiguous and provable; they don't have extraneous functions that have nothing to do with the design, either.  You claim that humans were designed, yet you only point to something and say, "see, design!"  That isn't how you show that something was designed.  You show that something is designed by showing what it was designed to do, and showing that it is focused towards that purpose.  You can't show that with any life form, or with humans, or even with planets.  You can only present guesses based on ancient mythology, and that doesn't work.

Dismissing absurdities?
Exactly.  You're just dismissing things without thinking about them.  The fact that you call something an absurdity is nothing but an excuse to toss it aside without even giving it a second's thought.

Quote from: rockv12
Far-fetched theories of animals gliding off cliffs with wide arms?  Dismissing silly notions that a light-sensing cell aided anything to any degree?  Dismissed bizarre comparisons of hummingbirds evolving because of....oh, there was no answer to that one.
Again, and again, and again, you make the same mistake of allowing your preconceptions and your emotions to override your reason and your rational judgment.  I surely hope you do not try to do this in your job, especially if you do work in the medical field as you say.

Quote from: rockv12
Too ignorant?  I love that excuse.
I suspect it's because you're busy patting yourself on the back and congratulating yourself for coming up with dismissals, and naturally you assume that if you think it's good, then why, it must be good and someone who doesn't agree must not be able to compare to your intellect.[1]  However, your arguments range from unconvincing to ludicrous, and demonstrate your inherent ignorance about this field.

Quote from: rockv12
I'm simply pointing out flaws and exaggerations in the theory that everybody seems to ignore because there are NO answers to them..  It's easier to see evolution as simple and easy, but really think about how and why things would progress they way they have.  Order does not come from disorder.  That's a fact.
I already disproved "order does not come from disorder".  Smaller flakes of cereal will sort themselves via gravity to the bottom of the cereal box, while the larger flakes will stay at the top.  As a result, you will end up with the box naturally ordering itself from the random arrangement of flakes as they were put into the box.  The fact that you thought (and probably still think) that this is absurd does not make it so, it simply shows that you are ignorant of the subject that you are busy decrying.  It's the same way with your arguments against evolution.  You point out things that the theory does not yet explain, and assume that they cannot be explained because nobody has one that satisfies you.  However, this is nothing more than your personal incredulity towards evolution at work, which is blatantly obvious no matter how many times you claim otherwise.
 1. Yes, this was sarcasm.  At this point I'm not sure you would even recognize it as such unless I pointed it out to you.
Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!"  If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #540 on: March 29, 2012, 08:40:55 PM »

No one is claiming a snowflake acts in a purposeful manner. On the other hand, you have claimed that "order does not come from disorder". Water crystals (and a number of other things) clearly contradict this. Are you willing to admit you were wrong?
 

I know nobody is claiming that.  They were claiming that a snowflake comes from disorder, therefore, I am incorrect.  I am speaking of purposeful order, not shapes being formed in order.  Gravity can pull things onto the ground, thus they are in the same plain (orderly).  But something was made and manufactures the snowflake that is orderly....science.  Snowflakes didn't exist before all the elements were lined up properly to form them...It is NOT random.  So, no, I will not admit I'm wrong, cuz I'm not.

Now back to the point of order I was making.  Ever heard of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics? 

What would cause life to spring up from elements floating around?  There is no natural selection/survival of the fittest with random particles floating around.  It falls to chance.  And purpose.  Now this is where you can't start in the middle with evolution.  You MUST first explain the foundation of things to begin to PROVE evolution as being true. 

Where did the things come from for the Big Bang?  Who knows?  They've always existed.  The same could be same for God.  We can't fathom such a thing.  Does it mean it's impossible?  No.  All it means is that we can't fathom it.  So why is belief in something that we can't explain irrational?  We ALL do it.  You do it...I do it.  So don't call me an idiot for believing in God, when you believe in the same type of unknown thing.

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5185
  • Darwins +106/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #541 on: March 29, 2012, 08:44:57 PM »
cuz I'm not.

Well "cuz", are you going to answer my questions or exhibit more willful ignorance and inculcated delusion sprinkled with delusions of an invisible designer?
Seriously, you guys are the meanest people I have ever met.  I hope you are happy and feel really good about yourself. 

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #542 on: March 29, 2012, 08:45:06 PM »

Yes.  And you have to be able to back it up, not just repeatedly say, "If you can't see design in X, then I don't know what to say."


Back up the evidence of design in the world?  I have to DO that?  What haven't I said?  Design is everywhere around us!!  You want an example?  The penis and the vagina.  There.  There's a great design!  The anus.  There's a great design.  Nice sphincter action right on our behind for us to squat.....happens really easily.  What if the anus was in front or on top?  It wouldn't work so nicely, would it?  What if the penis didn't get erect?  It wouldn't work so well, would it?  Anymore examples?

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #543 on: March 29, 2012, 08:46:19 PM »
cuz I'm not.

Well "cuz", are you going to answer my questions or exhibit more willful ignorance and inculcated delusion sprinkled with delusions of an invisible designer?

What was the question?  Am I willing to admit I'm wrong?  I did answer that.  No.  Because I'm not.  Did you read what I wrote?  You were mistaking my point....

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5185
  • Darwins +106/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #544 on: March 29, 2012, 08:47:55 PM »
What was the question?

You mean you can't read the thread where I asked it already?

And you want us to think you are educated?
Seriously, you guys are the meanest people I have ever met.  I hope you are happy and feel really good about yourself. 

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #545 on: March 29, 2012, 08:51:19 PM »
What was the question?

You mean you can't read the thread where I asked it already?

And you want us to think you are educated?

You know how many people are in here asking questions?  You're just one of the many that I'm responding to.  Be polite and re-state the question.  I'm not dodging it.  You don't have to be condescending.

What isn't designed?  I went up and missed your post...sorry.  What isn't designed?  ****after a few seconds of thought****  Ummm, I don't know.  It's all designed.  You don't see design in life?  Is a rock designed?  I suppose.  How is this relevant?  What's the point?  Since there are things that look "crappy", we can assume they are not designed?  So...what?  What are you getting at?
« Last Edit: March 29, 2012, 08:54:18 PM by rockv12 »

Offline kin hell

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5386
  • Darwins +152/-9
  • Gender: Male
  • - .... . .-. . /.. ... / -. --- / --. --- -.. ...
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #546 on: March 29, 2012, 08:52:19 PM »

Yes.  And you have to be able to back it up, not just repeatedly say, "If you can't see design in X, then I don't know what to say."


Back up the evidence of design in the world?  I have to DO that?  What haven't I said?  Design is everywhere around us!!  You want an example?  The penis and the vagina.  There.  There's a great design!  The anus.  There's a great design.  Nice sphincter action right on our behind for us to squat.....happens really easily.  What if the anus was in front or on top?  It wouldn't work so nicely, would it?  What if the penis didn't get erect?  It wouldn't work so well, would it?  Anymore examples?

well obviously you are forgetting the clever design of the pointy end of turd.
Like everything you've mentioned it was designed.
It stops your anus from violently clacking shut after each defecation.

Much like your pointy head.
"...but on a lighter note, demons were driven from a pig today in Gloucester."  Bill Bailey

all edits are for spelling or grammar unless specified otherwise

Offline HAL

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 5185
  • Darwins +106/-17
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #547 on: March 29, 2012, 08:54:16 PM »
You know how many people are in here asking questions?  You're just one of the many that I'm responding to.  Be polite and re-state the question.  I'm not dodging it.  You don't have to be condescending.

You know how much I have to do here on a daily basis? You're just one of the many that I'm responding to. Be polite and research my question. You don't have to be this lazy.
Seriously, you guys are the meanest people I have ever met.  I hope you are happy and feel really good about yourself. 

Offline Alzael

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3577
  • Darwins +112/-23
  • Gender: Male
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #548 on: March 29, 2012, 08:57:43 PM »

Yes.  And you have to be able to back it up, not just repeatedly say, "If you can't see design in X, then I don't know what to say."


Back up the evidence of design in the world?  I have to DO that?  What haven't I said?  Design is everywhere around us!!

As was asked, what would something not designed look like? If you can't answer that then how would you know it was designed or not?

You want an example?  The penis and the vagina.  There.  There's a great design!  The anus.  There's a great design.  Nice sphincter action right on our behind for us to squat.....happens really easily.  What if the anus was in front or on top?  It wouldn't work so nicely, would it?  What if the penis didn't get erect?  It wouldn't work so well, would it?  Anymore examples?

Am I the only one who finds it oddly fitting that all of  Rockys evidence seems to have come from contemplating his asshole.?
"I drank what?!"- Socrates

"Dying for something when you know you'll be resurrected is not a sacrifice.It's a parlour trick."- an aquaintance

Philip of Macedon: (via messenger) If we enter Sparta, we will raze all your buildings and ravage all your women.
Spartan Reply: If.

Offline rockv12

  • Emergency Room
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
  • Darwins +3/-44
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #549 on: March 29, 2012, 08:58:53 PM »

well obviously you are forgetting the clever design of the pointy end of turd.
Like everything you've mentioned it was designed.
It stops your anus from violently clacking shut after each defecation.


My pointy head...thanks.  Good one.  We need a little 3rd grade humor once in a while in here.

So you agree that the anus appears to be a good design?  Can you explain the evolution behind it to me?

Offline jetson

  • Administrator
  • *******
  • Posts: 8508
  • Darwins +369/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Meet George Jetson!
    • Jet Blog
Re: The Probability of the Big Bang
« Reply #550 on: March 29, 2012, 09:00:02 PM »
Alright, what's going on in here?  Who is this rocky character stirring up trouble?  Do I need to break out my Berkeley link?