Why MT doesn't believe in this.

[Commander Sparrow]

Well, now i'm just not satisfied. I'm sorry, but i'm out.

[The Master]

You should not be in this discussion at all. You are like twelve years old. Any arguments you make will either be stupid, or regurgitated from words people smarter than you have spoken.

Who do you think you are to tell me where I can and cannot post. You're an overgrown manchild who has cuss every sentence to get attention. And while I have been able to keep things in perspective everyone here is going way overboard about trying to make the other person look like an idiot. Go get lives people this isn't real life sitting on a computer. Col and Yanoda can continue hating each other in PMs and we can go back to just posting our comments.

[Col. Hstar]

You should not be in this discussion at all. You are like twelve years old. Any arguments you make will either be stupid, or regurgitated from words people smarter than you have spoken.

Who do you think you are to tell me where I can and cannot post. You're an overgrown manchild who has cuss every sentence to get attention. And while I have been able to keep things in perspective everyone here is going way overboard about trying to make the other person look like an idiot. Go get lives people this isn't real life sitting on a computer. Col and Yanoda can continue hating each other in PMs and we can go back to just posting our comments.

Let's get one thing straight first off the bat. I don't hate Yanoda, or anyone else for posting views I don't believe in. Hating someone for being different, or thinking different is ignorant and stupid.

Second this is a discussion thread, if all your looking for is a place where you can troll and give quick little one liners go to the troll page. Being that it's a discussion thread, we don't need to use private messages. Why do you think this topic reached 60+ pages? Because it's about something that we all have an opinion about.

No one is trying to make anyone look like an idiot. Nobody comes on here expecting the other person to say WOW I'VE BEEN WRONG ALL ALONG!! We are DISCUSSING IT. We disagree, we strongly disagree, maybe in some places we have gone a little far, but no one hates each other. If you don't like the tone of the thread, why did you start it back up?

[11_Panama_]

Because he's a troll wannabe. He necroed the thread and now is acting as if all of us are wasting our time with it. I believe "Hypocrite" is the word I should use. I ain't mad at you Bueno but your coming off alittle selfish. You kinda whine about others posts and threads. Somethings are bettter left unsaid. But not this...this had to be said.

[[m'kay]]

You should not be in this discussion at all. You are like twelve years old. Any arguments you make will either be stupid, or regurgitated from words people smarter than you have spoken.

Who do you think you are to tell me where I can and cannot post. You're an overgrown manchild who has cuss every sentence to get attention. And while I have been able to keep things in perspective everyone here is going way overboard about trying to make the other person look like an idiot. Go get lives people this isn't real life sitting on a computer. Col and Yanoda can continue hating each other in PMs and we can go back to just posting our comments.

Manchild? Kid, I am a child. I'm eighteen years old, dumbass. As for overgrown, yeah I suppose that's a fair point, but I really don't see what that has to do with anything. And no, you don't get to sit there and go "well I'M debating well but you guys are [m'kay] idiots". You have contributed absolutely nothing of worth to the discussion, so trying to pretend like you're being the "mature one" isn't doing anything for you. We're aware that this isn't real life, you smug little idiot. That's not even a factor in this. At some point you need to realize that people, you know, find enjoyment in things that are on the internet? And that sometimes people enjoy arguing? And that some of us aren't [m'kay] twelve year olds that project their imagined "no life" issues onto other people?

Get out of this topic, you egotistic dumbass. You aren't wanted here. Go do whatever in other topics, but this one is supposed to be some [poo] debate, and you are not fit to be in the discussion.

And Sparrow? You're welcome.

[Yanoda]

Regardless of what the past few posts were about.

Actually the quotes you posted of me "bending" scientific data to meet my arguments is wrong and shows the problem with what you view as scientific data. Looking around at creation and deciding that it must have been designed is an observation there was no data to bend there is no experiment that was conducted, it's an observation. If you think that was data you should review your own definition of the scientific process.

I have provided information/data (that has been validated) that indicate the Earth (and Universe) is far from perfect for sustaining human life, as you claim. You then claim, that this proves it that the Earth is perfect for sustaining human life.

Not perfect? As you say the rest of the universe is uninhabitable, I would think that fact alone should prove my case.

Either you're ignoring the data or just making wild assumptions. Do not forget that we have natural disasters (many people die because of them), diseases or extraterrestrial bodies (asteroids) that can cause considerable damage are just a few other examples.
Sources for the points I made previously on the Earth.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/top ... 1/seawater
http://ga.water.usgs.gov/edu/waterdistribution.html
http://www.learner.org/courses/envsci/u ... 7&secNum=2

I'd like to give an example of why the design analogy (Watchmaker Analogy) is flawed. Not forgetting the point that making an observation does not indicate the observation as true. Experiments need to be conducted and data collected to validate the observation. Making a claim based on an observation without validation can be quite detrimental and is not a valid argument.
I will use the same principle you used Homestar.

Liquids-Unknown.jpg (18.34 KiB) Viewed 1005 times

There are 4 cups and all have a liquid in them.

Using your analogy (Watchmaker argument) goes as follows:
All four cups have a clear liquid.
Water is a clear liquid.
Therefore, all four cups must be water.

Not only is this a false/misleading observation, but you have no facts/data that validates your observation or claim. I doubt you would ever come to this conclusion and drink from one of the cups (which is not recommended). Yet, you openly accept the concept of the Watchmaker Analogy...

Here are what the liquids really are:

Liquids_1.jpg (20.84 KiB) Viewed 1005 times

Source: http://www.inquiryinaction.org/chemistryreview/liquids/

Cheers

Yanoda

[Col. Hstar]

On phone again so I'll deal with perfection issue on a later post. But as for the water analogy, your talking about making making an observation without any facts. Seeing clear liquid and assuming water. That doesn't fit with what I observe when looking at creation. A better comparison would be that I see all 4 cups have a clear liquid each about the same level, all are marked with a different liquid and each contain that liquid. Would it be rational to assume that they ended up that way alone? No someone intelligent had to put them there in the correct order.

[Darth Crater]

So, it seems that the problem here is that you see some evidence of design in the universe where we don't. What evidence is this, and where is it?

Preemptively: Earth is not designed for humans. Humans developed for the conditions of Earth.

[Yanoda]

On phone again so I'll deal with perfection issue on a later post. But as for the water analogy, your talking about making making an observation without any facts. Seeing clear liquid and assuming water. That doesn't fit with what I observe when looking at creation. A better comparison would be that I see all 4 cups have a clear liquid each about the same level, all are marked with a different liquid and each contain that liquid. Would it be rational to assume that they ended up that way alone? No someone intelligent had to put them there in the correct order.

Then provide the data that validates your assumption that someone placed the cups there. You're using the same Watchmaker Argument to address the fallacy of the Watchmaker argument I just provided. You haven't provided facts or evidence to validate your observation that life must be designed, just like my vector image was designed. So what is/are the evidence(s) validating your claim?

Cheers

Yanoda

[Col. Hstar]

So, it seems that the problem here is that you see some evidence of design in the universe where we don't. What evidence is this, and where is it?

Preemptively: Earth is not designed for humans. Humans developed for the conditions of Earth.

So this is a long response for those of you who hate reading more then two lines, sorry

We'll look at the elements that are vital for us to be alive, carbon, oxygen, and iron.

The universe is as most of you would agree, expanding. That expansion, is finely tuned at the right speed, to allow life to be sustained. Like stretching a rubber band, if you pull to fast it snaps, if you pull to slow it contracts back into itself. A noted physicist and astronomer Sir Bernard Lovell said “If the Universe had expanded one million millionth part faster, then all the material in the Universe would have dispersed by now. . . . And if it had been a million millionth part slower, then gravitational forces would have caused the Universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence.” So the gravitational pull allows the elements to keep their form.

The same is with the electromagnetic force. If that was slightly weaker, electrons would not be held around the nucleus of an atom, which would then be unable to combine to form molecules. If it were stronger the electrons would be trapped on the nucleus preventing the chemical reactions between atoms, again resulting in no life. Once again this would require a finely tuned electromagnetic force.
Then there are the nuclear forces that bond the nucleus of the atoms together, if the strength of this force was 2% weaker, then only hydrogen would exist, if it was stronger, the heavier ones could exist but no hydrogen would be found.

Is it possible the extremely fine tuning of these forces came about purely by chance? Yes it is possible, but now I want to add one more factor to the equation. The Second Law of Thermodynamics. Here is the definition:
An expression of the tendency that over time, differences in temperature, pressure, and chemical potential equilibrate in an isolated physical system so as to result in the natural entropic dissolution of the system itself.

Basically when elements are left to themselves, things tend to break down. As a quick example, if you’re a homeowner, you know that you must maintain your house or it will deteriorate, and break down. If left completely alone a bicycle or an automobile will become scrap. In the universe the law applies as well, so if your position is that these forces all came into order by pure chance, why then are they not following the laws of physics? The only answer to this is that the universe as a whole is a highly organized state that came from a highly organized source. Chaos cannot produce and maintain order