Why MT doesn't believe in this.

[Col. Hstar]

You don't have to suppose that there is an architect of the universe, irrespective of whether s/he exists or not. Why?

Because the hypothesis of God does not help us to make any predictions.

In other words, let's put it this way: If the business of Science is to make predictions about what's going to happen, you do not need God as a hypothesis (to make succesful predictions), because it makes no difference to anything. If you say everthing is controlled by God, everything is governed by God, that doesn't make any difference to your prediciton of what's going to happen. But if you can predict, if you can study the past, describe how things have behaved, and you've got some regularities in the behaviour in the universe then you can begin to understand the law of the universe (or at least regularities) and so the whole architect hypothesis becomes irrelevant. Get rid of the lawmaker, keep the law.

Irrelevant to what? I guess what I'm asking is what are you trying to predict. If you talking about some thing like predicting the effects of global warming that's fine. But if your talking about predicting the future course of a life forms evolutionary process, it' wrong. The reason is because you starting with a faulty idea that life came from an evolution. That's like mapping out directions without knowing where you're coming from.
One thing that I want to make clear is that I have nothing against science, I have nothing against the scientific process. In school I actually loved science. If you can study something and learn more about it even predicting what will happen, I'm all for it. Why I do take issue is when you scientific data is twisted and stretched for the purpose of coming to a conclusion.

[Darth Crater]

Sir Bang is completely correct. The scientific process is valuable everywhere, and ideas that aren't testable or useful for prediction aren't worth consideration. Natural selection is favored because it most easily explains the evidence and most accurately predicts results. Science doesn't arbitrarily stop working when it comes to areas you disagree with.

[Col. Hstar]

Science doesn't arbitrarily stop working when it comes to areas you disagree with.

Your absolutely right, but it does stop working when, the scientist misinterprets the data, or bends the results to conform to their hypothesis

After making a diagnosis a doctor might run a full battery of tests to confirm his suspicion, the tests are all useful, they are all helpful. But if that doctor misreads the results, or is so focused on what his initial diagnosis is, things can turn out terrible

[Darth Crater]

I agree completely. Perhaps you should stop misinterpreting the data and bending the results toward your personal hypothesis.

Note that most of the scientists who discovered, worked on, or agreed with the theory of natural selection, both today and in the past, were Christian. They didn't let that get in the way of looking at the facts.

[WD-40]

Personally...We are all just ants in an ant farm. God already knows exactly how things will occur, how they'll evolve and how they'll end. So just accept your part, eat the [poo] sandwich you've been served, and smile with poop covered teeth and be grateful you are being allowed the opportunity to type some BS complaint about it all...

[Yanoda]

They are beliefs, you just like to label them as scientific facts to bolster your case.

Remember that you were the first to mention this argument using my vector art. You were the first to use this argument and did not use evidence, only arguments based on assumptions.
I base my views on what has been researched and what evidence has been collected. This is far from having a belief. So stop making these baseless claims.

[quote="Col. Homestar"]As far as the watch maker theory crap, let me see if I have your argument right.
An object like a watch must be designed because it can not reproduce it self. Therefore it must be designed by a person. Life on the other hand can reproduce itself so it needs no designer, it just came to be. And comparing the two is invalid because we are talking about animate, and inanimate things. Yet this helps my case even more. A human being and the bio mechanics that makes us live is much much more complex then any inanimate object, and you want people to believe that while the inanimate object needs to be designed by someone, we came about by chance, and with no design. That's the fallacy of your watch maker argument. You ignore the core issue and want to nit pick details of the argument.[quote]

Way to totally take my argument out of context Col. bravo!
All I said, is that the designer and design analogy (Watchmaker analogy/fallacy) cannot be compared, nothing more and nothing less. You make something out of it, blow it out of proportions and claim I make these assumptions.
I never stated life randomly came to be or started instantaneously. You're the one that makes these claims.
What current evidence indicate, is that chemical processes have enabled the bonding of amino acids into more complex molecules like proteins. Further processes enabled the formation of simple RNA and DNA molecules, more processes then enabled the development of cells and higher, more developed organisms. Note that these processes occurred over very long periods of time.
Please explain the meaning of design, the most ordered structures in nature are crystals. Yet we do not claim a designer created the crystals. The processes of Evolution (the four points I listed in a previous post, with links provided) enable the advancement of life without a design concept. The very process of Evolution designs the life.

[quote="Col. Homestar"]As I've said before, posting you-tube videos, and links to websites, is basically a lazy way of making your case. If you understand what you believe in, you should be able to explain it. To me evolution vs creation, involves to a great degree, God. Therefore I use the bible greatly in as my evidence and proof. Your deeply rooted in your beliefs, as I am in mine. At times I feel (as I'm sure you do too) like I'm talking to a wall, er I mean a deaf and blind person since you don't like to compare objects with people [quote]
Posting videos relevant to the subject is more productive and valid than making baseless claims, distorting the opposition's arguments, editing previous posts to make you seem better, ignoring the sources I provide that make your arguments/claims baseless and claiming the opposition is based on belief despite them providing evidence.
To be frank and honest, your arguments have been lacking. And now you're resulting to insults...

Cheers

Yanoda

[Col. Hstar]

I haven't changed any of your quotes or postings. Your the one who can't seem to get the quote tabs to work correctly. Everytime you make another post it gets more jumbled together. I have all the evidence I need for my beliefs you have all yours. We can each bury our heads in our respective holes. And BTW insulting? Look at the titles to your videos you post, then come back and talk to me about insulting.

EDIT: @ Crater please show me one scientific fact that I posted where I bent the data to conform to my argument.

[[m'kay]]

People, if you're typing more than two paragraphs per post, you're getting up your own ass and nobody that isn't afflicted with a serious case of internet aspergers is going to give a [m'kay] about what you say. Keep the debates to a reasonable length for [m'kay]'s sake, it's pointless to participate in a discussion where both sides are just trying to drown eachother in words.

[11_Panama_]

Yeah, use pictures and drawings. I actually get bored after reading a few paragraphs....because I know the next guy in the rebbutal is going to paste all of the previous posts and his half a page response. Let's call it a tie....non-believers can live their Godless lives, while the believers can go to Heaven and have eternal life. Ok?

[Hobo]

Grrrrr I wish I could debate along with y'all, several things caught my eye as I skimmed down the page; But I'm gonna be off to a two week camp starting tomorrow morning. See y'all then.