There Can be no "Intelligent Design"

[allfoak]

It is good to see that you enjoy what you do @Mestemia.

 

[Dante Writer]

False dichotomy.


Define for the thread in context "chaos".


Oh goody, a math claim!!

Please show your math, including where and why you chose the numbers you use.

Now why would I supply math when the definition was a scientific theory explanation of Chaos not a mathematical solution to a problem?

Silly people!

 

[Dante Writer]

False dichotomy.


Define for the thread in context "chaos".


di·chot·o·my

noun

1. a division or contrast between two things that are or are represented as being opposed or entirely different.

Intelligent design

de·sign

1. 1.
   a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made.
   "he has just unveiled his design for the new museum"
   synonyms: plan, blueprint, drawing, sketch, outline, map, plot, diagram, draft,representation, scheme, model
   "a design for the offices"
2. 2.
   purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object.

cha·os

1. complete disorder and confusion.
   "snow caused chaos in the region"
   synonyms: disorder, disarray, disorganization, confusion, mayhem, bedlam,pandemonium, havoc, turmoil, tumult, commotion, disruption, upheaval,uproar, maelstrom; More
   • PHYSICS
     behavior so unpredictable as to appear random, owing to great sensitivity to small changes in conditions.
   • the formless matter supposed to have existed before the creation of the universe.

Keep trying- you will get it!

 

[McBell]

Now why would I supply math when the definition was a scientific theory explanation of Chaos not a mathematical solution to a problem?

Silly people!

I know right.
People claiming math supports their "argument" but then refusing to show the math....

 

[Dante Writer]

I know right.
People claiming math supports their "argument" but then refusing to show the math....

When you show where I claimed a math expression in my position you let me know!

 

[McBell]

When you show where I claimed a math expression in my position you let me know!

How can you make claims of what is and what is not possible without math?
Or are you claiming you are philosophically making possible and impossible claims?

 

[Dante Writer]

How can you make claims of what is and what is not possible without math?
Or are you claiming you are philosophically making possible and impossible claims?

Math is only one way to obtain an answer and not the only way and does not apply to all questions.

 

[McBell]

Math is only one way to obtain an answer and not the only way and does not apply to all questions.

yet when making math claims (I.E. possibility) math is used...

Nice try though.

 

[Dante Writer]

yet when making math claims (I.E. possibility) math is used...

Nice try though.

I did not make a math claim- nice try though!

 

[McBell]

I did not make a math claim- nice try though!

ah.
More pigeon chess.
at least you are predictable.

 

[Dante Writer]

So far you have not presented anything of substance. If you want to play chess I would destroy you but first you have to put your pieces on the board.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I did not make a math claim- nice try though!

You are a liar:

A beach shoreline would be much more likely to happen from chaos creation as it does not reproduce itself and remains random. No two beaches the same.

However a living organism that can function, move, think and reproduce itself is such a massive step up from a beach or a watch that to believe it is the result of chaos creation is just not mathematically logical in my opinion.

To assert the probability of something is to make a mathematical claim, since probability is a mathematical measure of likelihood. You have made a "math claim". And you are a liar for denying it.

Now, where is this "math" that you used to reach your conclusion?

 

[Dante Writer]

You are a liar:


To assert the probability of something is to make a mathematical claim, since probability is a mathematical measure of likelihood. You have made a "math claim". And you are a liar for denying it.

Now, where is this "math" that you used to reach your conclusion?

The only liar here is you.

If you want to do the math and prove my statement wrong I gave you the way to calculate the odds.

The burden of proof is on you.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The only liar here is you.

If you want to do the math and prove my statement wrong I gave you the way to calculate the odds.

The burden of proof is on you.

I'm not sure you understand how burden of proof works. The burden of proof means the person making the claim is the one required to demonstrate that it is true.

You made the claim that something "is not mathematically logical". You have to demonstrate it. If you can't, then I have no reason to accept your statement is true. Present your working.

 

[Dante Writer]

You made the claim that math was required.

The burden of proof is on you.

Where is your math for the odds of a watch forming from parts in a box or the odds of surviving jumping off the empire state building?

I made it clear that any intelligent person can understand those as highly improbable without any math.

Since you must think that statement is not true and you like math then prove me wrong using math.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You made the claim that math was required.

Because you made a mathematical claim. I have proven that.

The burden of proof is on you.

I met the burden. I quoted you making a mathematical claim. When are you going to meet YOUR burden of proof and actually demonstrate said claim is true?

Where is your math for the odds of a watch forming from parts in a box or the odds of surviving jumping off the empire state building?

You made the claim, not me.

I made it clear that any intelligent person can understand those as highly improbable without any math.

You previously said that they were "not mathematically logical". So demonstrate your maths.

Since you must think that statement is not true and you like math then prove me wrong using math.

I didn't say that the statement wasn't true - I said you have to demonstrate that it IS true. Can you do that?

 

[Dante Writer]

Because you made a mathematical claim. I have proven that.


I met the burden. I quoted you making a mathematical claim. When are you going to meet YOUR burden of proof and actually demonstrate said claim is true?


You made the claim, not me.


You previously said that they were "not mathematically logical". So demonstrate your maths.


I didn't say that the statement wasn't true - I said you have to demonstrate that it IS true. Can you do that?

You made the claim that math was required.

The burden of proof is on you.

Where is your math for the odds of a watch forming from parts in a box or the odds of surviving jumping off the empire state building?

I made it clear that any intelligent person can understand those as highly improbable without any math.

Since you must think that statement is not true and you like math then prove me wrong using math.

Still waiting for your math?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You made the claim that math was required.

The burden of proof is on you.

You really don't seem to understand. You made the mathematical claim, the burden is on you. I'm really not interested in continuing this dance with you.

Where is your math for the odds of a watch forming from parts in a box or the odds of surviving jumping off the empire state building?

I don't have any, because I've never claimed to. You claimed it was "mathematically illogical". So where is your maths?

I made it clear that any intelligent person can understand those as highly improbable without any math.

Probability IS maths, so what you're saying here makes no sense.

Since you must think that statement is not true and you like math then prove me wrong using math.

I never said the statement wasn't true. I asked you to demonstrate that it IS.

Still waiting for your math?

The fact that you are continuing to dodge the burden of proof is making it increasingly clear that you don't actually have any facts to support your opinion. You're just coming off as desperate.

 

[Dante Writer]

You really don't seem to understand. You made the mathematical claim, the burden is on you. I'm really not interested in continuing this dance with you.


I don't have any, because I've never claimed to. You claimed it was "mathematically illogical". So where is your maths?


Probability IS maths, so what you're saying here makes no sense.


I never said the statement wasn't true. I asked you to demonstrate that it IS.


The fact that you are continuing to dodge the burden of proof is making it increasingly clear that you don't actually have any facts to support your opinion. You're just coming off as desperate.

This line of debate is now finished- go start your own discussion instead of trolling my posts.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Here we go again.

You shirk your burden of proof over and over, then simply claim someone is a troll and dismiss them. YAWN

Here's a hint, if you have to accuse practically every other person on the forum of being a troll ... you're probably the troll.