What will you do when the tests in science point to an Intelligent Designer? [Spirituality & Religion]

@GodSpeed63 Lee Strobel isn't a scientist... he's a hack journalist.

Jonathan Wells isn't a scientist... he publishes no peer-reviewed work, and has zero annual citations in the literature

Who else do you have..?

@GodSpeed63 Argument by YouTube... hilarious!

my turn! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyhZcEY5PCQ

I guess you've answered my question?

@HerKing I see no reason to continue this conversation, as you’ve already stated you are a non-believer. You’ve made your choice. That's all I have to contribute to this discussion.

@LadyGrace I was feeling the same..

Yes. We’ll just agree to disagree. 😊 Thanks for the chat. It was interesting. @HerKing

@LadyGrace Your point? Having read the actual theory, I can say, yeah. That's true.

But it does not figure God into the beginning space. It fails just before that point.

Was that meant to be a 'Gotcha'?

@SW-User I think anything anyone says to you, you refute because you don’t want to believe. If that was meant to be a “gotcha”, I wouldn’t have replied to Godspeed, now would I? Don’t assume. What I said makes sense.

@LadyGrace I believe a claim if it has something verifiable to back it up. It makes sense to you precisely because you want it to.

That's the thing about science : it's self-correcting. If something in a theory or concept is discovered to be wrong, then the theory changes, not the facts! Facts can't be twisted to suit theories. That's just not how things work.

@Autumnlover me too

Why does God have to be created before it makes sense to you?

@GodSpeed63 Logic, basically. If a being has the ability and mind to plan a world as complex as ours, accepting at face value that the being was “just there” is not enough information for me. I assumed when I was small I would learn these things as I became an adult, but no one’s been able to explain it to my satisfaction.

@bijouxbroussard Yes, I hear you. 'Just there' is inexplicable and incomprehensible. But [u]existence[/u] itself is, 'just there' and therefore 'why does anything exist at all' is also inexplicable and incomprehensible (one of the questions considered unanswerable by philosophy and science). Big bang does not explain existence, it only explains the universe. It emerged from what?

Lawrence Krauss posits 'quantum fluctuation' to explain something from nothing. A false vacuum fluctuated into existence, creating space and time... I heard him unable to defend it very well though:
'So if it fluctuates, this "nothing" has properties. It can't be nothing if it has properties.'
'No it is nothing.'
'How can it fluctuate?'

His view is considered one of the best answers - along with: it didn't have a beginning (series of endless universes). Which simply begs the question. The universe is a text book copied from a previous text book, which was... which is like asking what was the tortoise standing on? Yet another tortoise. It is EXACTLY the same dilemma.