A simple case for intelligent design

[Subduction Zone]

I thought you claimed an affinity with secular scholars?

Virtually all New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain[2][3][4][5][nb 1][nb 2][nb 3][nb 4][nb 5] although they differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels

Source: Historicity of Jesus - Wikipedia

You should read more than just the first chapter. The article agrees with what I said. That Jesus probably existed, though the evidence for him is poor.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Because they can’t or won’t accept something larger and more knowledgeable than themselves in their ego’s. The damage to their ID would be devastating to admit such a thing.

As a Christian you shouldn't break the Ninth Commandment.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You should read more than just the first chapter. The article agrees with what I said. That Jesus probably existed, though the evidence for him is poor.

Of course it is. The Jewish scholars didn’t want to admit they killed the Son of God, and to the Romans he had no significance other than another of the thousands they executed.

Why would you expect to find a preponderance of evidence outside of those that wrote his history that was put in the Bible?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

As a Christian you shouldn't break the Ninth Commandment.

As a non believer in the commandments, why would it matter?

Not that of course you provided even a declaration of opposition, which shows the truth stung, which is why you resorted to the sad attempt at character assassination.....

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Of course it is. The Jewish scholars didn’t want to admit they killed the Son of God, and to the Romans he had no significance other than another of the thousands they executed.

Why would you expect to find a preponderance of evidence outside of those that wrote his history that was put in the Bible?

Why wouldn't we expect a preponderance of evidence for someone whose miracles were, according to the Bible, witnessed by thousands of people, who was an enemy of the state, whose death and resurrection raised an army of people to also rise from death and who subsequently ascended to heaven?

If your standard for evidence is so low for Jesus, is it the same for all claims made in the Qu'ran, or the Gita, or the Triptaka?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

As a non believer in the commandments, why would it matter?

Not that of course you provided even a declaration of opposition, which shows the truth stung, which is why you resorted to the sad attempt at character assassination.....

It's a simple commandment; You bore false witness against your brothers. That's not character assassination, it's a simple statement of fact. You're the one disparaging people rather than putting forward sound arguments or reasoned debate.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Speaking of solid definitions, which of the 26 definitions of species are you claiming is correct?

“A biological species is a group of organisms that can reproduce with one another in nature and produce fertile offspring. Species are characterized by the fact that they are reproductively isolated from other groups, which means that the organisms in one species are incapable of reproducing with organisms in another species. The term species can also be defined as the most basic category in the system of taxonomy. Taxonomy is a scientific system that classifies organisms into categories based on their biological characteristics. Species can also be defined based on a shared evolutionary history and ancestry. This method of defining species is called phylogenetics, which is the study of the evolutionary relationships among organisms. The evolutionary process by which a new species comes into being is called speciation.”

species | Learn Science at Scitable

Can you identify ANY of those “missing common ancestors” for any of the claimed splits on every single tree? No, you cant even identify one, so why would missing the original pair bother you when every single one is missing in your belief, yet that doesn’t seem to bother you....

Your question doesn’t make sense. Can you re-phrase it?

Are you referring to Australopithecus afarensis? Haasiophis terrasanctus? Pezosiren portelli? Melittosphex burmensis? Halkiera?

How about Tiktaalik, which scientists predicted they should find if evolution were true, and they even knew where to go out and look for it.

https://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/searching4Tik.html

I’m trying to clarify with that poster what his definition of kind is, because it isn’t a term used in the science world.

But every creature in the fossil record remains distinct. You “claim” they split to become other creatures, but can’t point to one single common ancestor because they are all missing.

You are using a very outdated creationist argument that is not rooted in reality. Because in reality, scientists have discovered many different transitional fossils in the record. They also use genetics to demonstrate degrees of relatedness between living creatures.

Here’s a link to a discussion on human ancestry in the fossil record:

Fossils

So, as you can see, your claim is not rooted in reality.

At least the fossil record shows creatures remain the same across your claimed millions of years, backing an original pair. You can’t even show change without resorting to those missing common ancestors.

No, the fossil record does not show creatures remain the same across millions of years or that there are original pairs anywhere.

Any small changes that do occur are nothing more than the change of a wolf to a poodle, change within the “Kind”, not species to species......

Nonsense. Google “ring species.”

Can you define “kind” in any kind of meaningful way? That was the point of my discussion with BB.

But I understand, if all they had were the fossils of dogs, and had never seen them in real life, they would classify them as separate species and claim one evolved into another. No matter how “wrong” we know that to be in reality..... just as they classify creatures “wrong” in the fossil record and come to the “wrong” conclusions......

No, they would not. Scientists actually know what they’re doing.

 

[SkepticThinker]

If kind is equivalent to family, you are saying that during creation God made only one pair of mammals, not many species? Are you talking about some kind of theistic evolution instead?

I said that kind is equivalent to a "clade" in my opinion. But they aren't quite the same, as I pointed out, because "kind" assumes that there are 2 original kinds that we should be able to identify somewhere. A clade actually includes all of a creature's ancestors, but creationists don't accept that.

But you're the one claiming kinds. Science doesn't use that term. Can you define it, or not?

I actually think that if there is a God, it would be intelligent enough to have designed evolution as it is. The problem is that some creationists apparently don't think their God is that intelligent.

 

[SkepticThinker]

There is no evolution of ANY type. God made two canine types, and from there we get over 100 breeds. Not separate species..... they won’t even classify them correctly under their own classification system as subspecies, because doing so would show the error in other classifications....

That should be easy to demonstrate then. Where can we find the original 2 "canine types" that your God supposedly created? And you need to explain how they were created.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Because they can’t or won’t accept something larger and more knowledgeable than themselves in their ego’s. The damage to their ID would be devastating to admit such a thing.

Psychological projection at it's finest.

 

[viole]

You think super-intelligent aliens, who can fly FTL without injury or time dilation, etc. cannot engineer life, even though human scientists are trying to "ID" a duplication of abiogenesis?!

The point being there is nothing wrong with attempting to contact aliens who may have designed life. It's logical. Give up the double standard and anti-God bias!

Do you agree that those aliens might not have been designed?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Subduction Zone]

Of course it is. The Jewish scholars didn’t want to admit they killed the Son of God, and to the Romans he had no significance other than another of the thousands they executed.

Why would you expect to find a preponderance of evidence outside of those that wrote his history that was put in the Bible?

But he was almost certainly not the "Son of God" and some of the best evidence for that is found in the Bible.

 

[Subduction Zone]

As a non believer in the commandments, why would it matter?

Not that of course you provided even a declaration of opposition, which shows the truth stung, which is why you resorted to the sad attempt at character assassination.....

As a believer you should know that there are some parts of the Bible that are not totally wrong. Most people value honesty. You made a false accusation against your fellow man. That is not a wise thing to do. When people are dishonest it tends to irritate others.

And no, there was no character assassination by me. That was what you did. That was what I objected to. That was why I reminded you of the Ninth Commandment that you do not even seem to understand.

 

[tas8831]

As a non believer in the commandments, why would it matter?

LOL!

So then murder must be OK - after all, the dead person doesn't care!

 

[Justatruthseeker]

Why wouldn't we expect a preponderance of evidence for someone whose miracles were, according to the Bible, witnessed by thousands of people, who was an enemy of the state, whose death and resurrection raised an army of people to also rise from death and who subsequently ascended to heaven?

If your standard for evidence is so low for Jesus, is it the same for all claims made in the Qu'ran, or the Gita, or the Triptaka?

Who’s death and resurrection proved who he was and so was hushed up.

And those thousands of people willingly suffered torture and death instead of renouncing their faith..... BECAUSE they had witnessed his death, resurrection and miracles.

You got the testimony of thousands of eye witnesses that willingly gave their lives in testimony of the things they saw. A stronger testimony than some scribe writing something in a scroll that would be questioned someday by those looking for any excuse to deny the truth.

But you can’t erase those thousands that went to their deaths willingly no matter how much you might wish they hadn’t in their testimony of the reality....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

LOL!

So then murder must be OK - after all, the dead person doesn't care!

I don’t know is it? Are you declaring your belief in the commandments?

After all, animals don’t commit murder when they kill another animal......

 

[Justatruthseeker]

As a believer you should know that there are some parts of the Bible that are not totally wrong. Most people value honesty. You made a false accusation against your fellow man. That is not a wise thing to do. When people are dishonest it tends to irritate others.

And no, there was no character assassination by me. That was what you did. That was what I objected to. That was why I reminded you of the Ninth Commandment that you do not even seem to understand.

I made a truthful accusation against any that feel it might apply to them, but no one in particular. Did you somehow feel it was directed at you? That’s the way with truth, it cuts to the bone to any that hear it regardless if addressed to them or not.

This is like your false claims of evolution. I certainly do not believe you are lying when you claim you have proof, just flat out wrong......

Lies don’t offend, truth does. Which is why I am not offended when you try your sad little attempts at character assassination, because it simply tells me the truth cut deep and it is your last ditch effort to save your ego.....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

But he was almost certainly not the "Son of God" and some of the best evidence for that is found in the Bible.

Sure he was.......

And yet as always I see just claims with no citations in support. But that’s standard for an evolutionist...

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You think super-intelligent aliens, who can fly FTL without injury or time dilation, etc. cannot engineer life, even though human scientists are trying to "ID" a duplication of abiogenesis?!

The point being there is nothing wrong with attempting to contact aliens who may have designed life. It's logical. Give up the double standard and anti-God bias!

What aliens?

Oh, you mean the I want it to be so aliens... those....

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You are saying these super-intelligent aliens, who could break physical laws, like FTL travel, obey only physical laws, based on your axiomatic, anti-supernatural illogical reasoning?

Why of course, aliens can do anything, even design humans, because their complexity evolved ......... sigh......

Technically they are not breaking the laws of the speed of light, they are warping spacetime. Kind of like space expands faster than c, but galaxies aren’t really moving...... sigh......

You should no by now you can’t falsify Fairie Dust.....

Fabricated Ad-hoc Inventions Repeatedly Invoked in Effort to Defend Untenable Scientific Theory.....