Are you a creationist? Do you believe God created the Earth in 6000 years?

[Thraxox]

... Ok, ok... (forget about all that "religious" stuff...)

... and the "truth" is that DNA is "self-created", right?...

Don't even bother addressing him. All he do is spew some smart ass sentence to make his 'arguments' look good, but when you look closely its not even an argument It is some half assed rant with fancy words to make it sound smart.

[Mighty_Windir]

Voted yes, what a rebel

PS. God created the earth who knows when, and dinosaurs did exist, even in the bible there is some reference to some mythical beast you would only find in Final Fantasy

[Lomasexual]

Don't even bother addressing him. All he do is spew some smart ass sentence to make his 'arguments' look good, but when you look closely its not even an argument It is some half assed rant with fancy words to make it sound smart.

You really are touchy about the pedophile stuff, aren't you?

Let's make a deal. You quit molesting kids and I'll stop bringing it up.

[Zaryu]

You are not the first to feel this way, nor will you be the last.

However...

This problem which is often referred to as the irreducible complexity issue has been thoroughly debunked. Even Richard Dawkins book 'the blind watchmaker' would be a good starting point as to why the argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

However - there is a related, but more fundamental mystery, which has not been debunked. The mystery is to do with how we can find ourselves in a universe which seems to have physical laws tuned for the creation of life.

I feel it's related. I.e. Who tuned the physical laws?

[Zaryu]

I think the issue of complexity is also an issue with the big bang and what they call the fine tuning argument.

The way i see it is...we have realised that very simple natural processes can, over huge time spans, create great complexity which gives the impression of design.
This isnt proof that life or the universe wasnt designed, but it is a phenomenon we have observed in nature which requires no supernatural mysterious designer.
Plus the so-called 'design' seems massively flawed. The chaotic hostile fight for survival in nature, or the violence seen in the formation of stars and planets looks more like the work of natural forces than a brilliantly orchestrated plan.

Good comment.

[Zaryu]

Intelligent design leaves a problem though.
If there was indeed a designer of life, who created the designer?
If the theory is that something so complex couldn't have evolved to be that complex, so an intelligent being (God) stepped in and created it, then shouldn't the same theory apply to the intelligent being?

I've actually never had a problem with this. Provided we allow ourselves to consider the potential of a creator, this can be fixed if the creator is an eternal force, with no need to be created, through which everything is created.

The source of everything is both different and superior to the physical world we're limited to study.

[JJRod]

I've actually never had a problem with this. Provided we allow ourselves to consider the potential of a creator, this can be fixed if the creator is an eternal force, with no need to be created, through which everything is created.

The source of everything is both different and superior to the physical world we're limited to study.

Seems very convenient though.
For everything complex there has to be an intelligent designer, but as far as the designer himself- having to be the most complex thing in the universe- no need for him to be created. He exist outside our physical world.

[Lomasexual]

I feel it's related. I.e. Who tuned the physical laws?

I think it is a little bit early to attribute a 'who' to that.

The question of why we have the physical laws that we do, which allow for life to arise (amongst other things) is quite profound.

There are quite a few theories out there, but testing them is incredibly difficult - and a theory that can't be tested is not credible.

I like to read up on this problem, because it is fascinating. Yet I have never come to the conclusion that there must be some kind of agent who made it so as a creative act.
The idea of such an agent is introducing something supernatural, and arbitrary to the problem. In effect, it seems like giving up. Plus, as mentioned, it falls into the god-of-the-gaps fallacy - which has proven to be absolutely unreliable.

[Zaryu]

I think it is a little bit early to attribute a 'who' to that.

The question of why we have the physical laws that we do, which allow for life to arise (amongst other things) is quite profound.

There are quite a few theories out there, but testing them is incredibly difficult - and a theory that can't be tested is not credible.

I like to read up on this problem, because it is fascinating. Yet I have never come to the conclusion that there must be some kind of agent who made it so as a creative act.
The idea of such an agent is introducing something supernatural, and arbitrary to the problem. In effect, it seems like giving up. Plus, as mentioned, it falls into the god-of-the-gaps fallacy - which has proven to be absolutely unreliable.

That's fair. Good post.