Don't you feel its just beyond obvious that an Intelligent Designer created all this?

[NoMayo15]

We have just as much evidence for a creator as we have for matter spontaneously existing=none

You're just factually wrong.




For those who say tl;dw

[ame=http://youtu.be/9urEFoaI1iY]A Universe from Nothing - YouTube[/ame]

 

[rapbeats]

anyways, when looking from the definitions:


cha·os/ˈkāäs/
Noun:
Complete disorder and confusion.
Behavior so unpredictable as to appear random, owing to great sensitivity to small changes in conditions.


or·der/ˈôrdər/
Noun:
The arrangement or disposition of people or things in relation to each other according to a particular sequence, pattern, or method.


ran·dom/ˈrandəm/
Adjective:
Made, done, happening, or chosen without method or conscious decision: "a random sample of 100 households".
Governed by or involving equal chances for each item.


its pretty obvious which word best describes our universe. there are structured patterns and complex systems of organization from our smallest atomic particles to our largest celestial bodies. from the atom to the sun you have spheres rotating in an oval orbit creating electromagnetic energy. it's actually the same design, just on different scales, hence the axiom as above, so below.

if the atoms didnt organize themselves into some kind of system, nothing would ever manifest. the only reason you arent walking through walls, and the only reason every object in physical manifestation REMAINS in physical manifestation is because of the harmonious relationship created by those atoms-who all collectively resonate to the same frequency in a specific pattern of interlocking bonds to create a consistent vibration that will create a field that will mimic solid matter.

really think about that for a second.

again, im not necessarily arguing for one perspective over another, but i think those in the "random and chaotic" camp need to show a little more love to the design of the universe, and acknowledge its significance.

so if yall wanna discuss this from a different angle, or using different terminology, then thats cool. but using these definitions you cant logically say the universe is mostly random or chaotic. the guy from the video and most people in this thread are saying random and chaotic=no signs of physical life, which are not fair parameters. i dont think its objective.

because if anything the universe is full of order and it us-HUMANS, who are unpredictable and chaotic. WE do random shyt according to our free will. but the universe is running like clockwork

 

[daze23]

people always say this but thats nonsense.

you cant ask "who created the creator" until you acknowledge there is one. after that point you have to ask so many different questions about our creation, how, and why. how and why the universe. THEN after all those questions are answered you can ask "SO boss man, where did you come from? who created you?"
but first things first.

nah, you just treat it like any other hypothetical situation. you assume the existence of a creator, and ride the logic from there

 

[Mowgli]

wtf does that even mean, you sound like one of those twitter philosophers

Wow. Your mind is so feeble you couldnt even fathom a post. Ill rephrase.

How can you imagine something that has no beginning or infinite beginnings. You know how you clown atheists say *who created god* and *who created what created god*. Etc.

 

[NoMayo15]

that doesnt make the watchmaker argument fail.

the reason the watchmaker argument is always there. is because its all we've ever known. designers design things. they dont just appear out of thin air. never has. things are created. they arent just THERE. and if by chance that is the case with something. how on earth would we know it? we wouldnt.

No man. There's a difference between a watch, and say a rock. With a watch, we know it's man made. We can go to the people who designed it, speak with them, and they can confirm that they indeed did create it. We can see them, and that can be confirmed by objective observers. You can't say the same for a rock on the ground. There's no one we can speak to that can show the designs for it, and say they made it.

All you're doing is engaging in a bit of special pleading. You say everything must have a creator, except the creator. Why take that extra leap? Why not say everything must have a creator, except the initial singularity that expanded to create the universe? We can all agree that it probably existed. Why not say that it existed "forever"?

Wow. Your mind is so feeble you couldnt even fathom a post. Ill rephrase.

How can you imagine something that has no beginning or infinite beginnings. You know how you clown atheists say *who created god* and *who created what created god*. Etc.

You don't have to be very intelligent to imagine something infinite...

Maybe I'm not following you either.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Wow. Your mind is so feeble you couldnt even fathom a post. Ill rephrase.

How can you imagine something that has no beginning or infinite beginnings. You know how you clown atheists say *who created god* and *who created what created god*. Etc.

I don't imagine something, I just say, "I don't know" instead of saying God did it, thats the difference.

 

[Turenne]

this is very important. The human brain is hardwired to look for patterns/order out of chaos, it helps in survival, but it also can be deceiving.

Which is why this 'nature is so beautiful there must be a artist behind it' argument is one huge fallacy - nature appears beautiful to us because of chemicals in our brains combining to create particular emotions and feelings. Emotions and feelings are evolutionary impulses created by physical acts and necessary for practical reasons.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Which is why this 'nature is so beautiful there must be a artist behind it' argument is one huge fallacy - nature appears beautiful to us because of chemicals in our brains combining to create particular emotions and feelings. Emotions and feelings are evolutionary impulses created by physical acts and necessary for practical reasons.

I don't expect Intelligent Design proponents to understand a single thing about Evolution, natural selection or survival.

 

[Turenne]

you cant ask "who created the creator" until you acknowledge there is one.

...what kind of semantic fukking gibberish this...? How the fukk does this help your argument?

Either you argue that the creator is real and then you are forced to ask who created the creator or you admit you have no proof for the existence of a creator - which one is it?

 

[Turenne]

I don't expect Intelligent Design proponents to understand a single thing about Evolution, natural selection or survival.

What I find bizarre is this idea of how 'impressed' people are with the world. Yes this world is impressive, but how does this lend itself to a God having to have created it? We could have millions of different and deeply flawed universes moulded by evolution and natural selection - we have this one, rather then a slightly different one. What's so difficult and mindblowing to grasp about that?

 

[the cac mamba]

You can never fathom a beginning with no beginning. Give up.

if we cant fathom it, may i ask how people came to the idea of a creator in the place? shouldnt they have no right to attempt to fathom such an idea?

 

[NoMayo15]

if we cant fathom it, may i ask how people came to the idea of a creator in the place? shouldnt they have no right to attempt to fathom such an idea?

This.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

You're just factually wrong.

'A Universe From Nothing' by Lawrence Krauss, AAI 2009 - YouTube


For those who say tl;dw

A Universe from Nothing - YouTube

Not bad, good insight. Although most of what he said is still theory without much physical evidence, it is all very plausible. But in my opinion it doesn't disprove intelligent design.

Here is a response that i think is an equaly good read:

The Universe Arose out of Nothing? Logic is Apparently Not the life of Theoretical Physicists, Either « The Curmudgeon's Attic

if the universe is flat and with dark energy, it should have zero total energy, and we expect a universe arisen from nothing to have zero total energy.** Why is it expected that a universe arisen from nothing would have zero total energy?* He doesn’t say.* Are there other explanations for a zero total energy universe?* Doesn’t say that either.* His implication is that God (a “creator”)*is not necessary if the universe arose out of nothing, but where is the logical evidence that precludes God in such a universe?* And what does such a thing say for the Big Bang Theory, the source for*all this dark matter and energy needed to*zero out the energy equation?* By implication, how relevant is the Theory of Relativity if one asserts that something came from nothing?* In fact, is all of physics now suspect?* If effects don’t have causes, as would be the case in a universe that arose from nothing, how could physics legitimately explain anything?

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

Not bad, good insight. Although most of what he said is still theory without much physical evidence, it is all very plausible. But in my opinion it doesn't disprove intelligent design.

Here is a response that i think is an equaly good read:

The Universe Arose out of Nothing? Logic is Apparently Not the life of Theoretical Physicists, Either « The Curmudgeon's Attic

But why even throw God into the mix? It adds absolutely NOTHING to the discussion at hand. All it does is make people feel slightly better about their beliefs. You can't disprove something that isn't even provable in the first place.

 

[NoMayo15]

Not bad, good insight. Although most of what he said is still theory without much physical evidence, it is all very plausible. But in my opinion it doesn't disprove intelligent design.

Here is a response that i think is an equaly good read:

The Universe Arose out of Nothing? Logic is Apparently Not the life of Theoretical Physicists, Either « The Curmudgeon's Attic

Sure. It doesn't. As long as there are gaps in our knowledge, there are going to be people who want to fill that gap with Jeebus. It's no different than people attributing lightning to Zeus throwing lightning bolts to Earth. If you want to subscribe to that train of thought, then fine, that is your right. But you must realize that your position holds no weight.