The best evidence against intelligent design of life is the fact that we pewp.
When your design process isn't bound to any limitations whatsoever, why would anyone choose to make something that only utilizes half of its food and turns the rest of it into smelly waste that causes all kinds of diseases? 🤷
@newjaninev2 And you can't relate to that at all can you? The reality is that you are the same as them. The reality that it has everything to do with ideology and nothing to do with God, science, fallopian tubes, fish, evolution, reality, facts, evidence, truth, or anything else. Only ideology. We make ideas a part of us and then we have to defend them as if they were being attacked when someone else don't think the way we do. We think only we have the truth and the other person doesn't. We can never think we are wrong or the evidence is shit, or anything else other than we have to defend our beliefs. Our selves.
I know this because I used to be the same as you and the creationists. It doesn't bother me anymore to think that someone else doesn't think like me, that my beliefs could be wrong and theirs could be right - that never the twain shall meet - that both ideas have equal merit or at least exist simultaneously. Do you know what made me see through the blinding hate brought on by ideological fixation?
Jesus. Jesus and science. I've read the Bible many times; studied carefully for years, I've read that Jesus taught his disciples in parables so that the unbelievers wouldn't believe. He didn't want them to. He wasn't out there trying to subvert or convert the unbelievers. (Mark 4:10-13 https://biblehub.com/mark/4-10.htm) I had read this. I knew this. But I didn't see this or fully understand it.
If someone thinks Buddhism, science, or politics it doesn't bother me like it used to. I still think it's silly but I can see how what I believe is silly to someone else. I don't have a problem with the reality that I could be wrong. That's where the science comes in. If science minded atheists can't bear the reality of their fallibility, I mean more than in words, in reality, then science is a dead illusion. If science thinks it has to be right it can't see the possibility of it being wrong and if it can't do that it's just a dumb, fake religion.
The science minded atheists always say their science, or their thinking, their beliefs are fallible. They know it. They think it. But they don't see it or fully understand it. That is the reality.
So thanks for your silly little story about fallopian tubes and fish. You may have something there. And I wish you well with it. But it doesn't change anything and it will certainly never make any difference whatsoever. It may even be abandoned by you soon. Replaced by some other science. But it won't make any difference.
And that we need air, sleep, food, and water to survive. Intelligent design would immediately see the limitations of these things and make them unnecessary.
I have always said, " Sand/dirt doesn't need what we need to survive. How are we made of sand if we don't exist like sand/dirt?"
they weren't punished for something they didn't understand
Did they know that before eating from the tree of knowledge though? It's also interesting that they covered up the second they learned about good and evil. Doesn't that imply being naked is evil (according to the bible, not my judgment)? So why did God intent them to live that way?
Here me out. This is why I took so much offense at your saying I was making things up about what the Bible says and why you probably didn't properly understand my response that what the Bible says doesn't really matter.
There is so much nuance in the way we communicate that how we do that, especially through the spoken or written word, can be inaccurate or even deceptive. For example, I said the omni's were religious nonsense, and they are, but not for the reasons you stated. A very important part of accurate understanding is where the words being used come from. The why, who, what, and when of them as well. So, omni, a Latin word comes from omnis which means all or every. Religion thinks God is omnipresent, meaning he's everywhere simultaneously but the Bible says his position is fixed in heaven. He can't come here to this universe anymore than we could go inside a birdhouse we created. They also say he is omnipotent, meaning he is all powerful, and he is, but not in the way they say or you suggest.
Think of it like this: humans are omnivores. Does that mean they can eat every and all things? Broken glass? Poison? Nuclear explosions or the space time continuum? It simply means they eat meat and plant. Part of the problem is people often take religious ideas to an extreme rather than thinking about them much, and then it becomes tradition. The traditions of men.
Also, there is the way words evolve. Gay, queer, fag, for example. Hell. And how no Bible is perfect and translations often reflect religious traditions instead of what it actually says. So, Jesus never died on a cross. We know this for a variety of reasons but when I say that someone can site many Bible passages that use the word cross. Translated from the word stauros which means a piece of timber, it has meant, over the centuries, a single upright pole, tree, t, T, X shaped, multiple pieces, etc. In Jesus' day the Romans used a single upright pole like the Hebrews used. They crucified (a word that means to be fastened to something, like Prometheus was crucified, fastened to rock or the earth) a lot of people in an area that was more a desert. Not a lot of trees. Why would they use two pieces when they only needed one? Later the Roman cross changed into various shapes. The one Constantine used was an odd one:
The Egyptians had their own, the Christians use the later Roman cross, even after Constantine. He lived ~300 years after Christ. He was a pagan sun worshipper. They used the crosses because they were fertility symbols. Phallic symbols, representing the male penis. Christians and Jews thought of the cross as a filthy or dungy idol. God called it that when he said his priests were shoving their penis in his face because Tammuz, known as Nimrod or the Sumerian King Dumuzid, was the originator of the cross. His priests were carving the shape into the walls of his temple. (Ezekiel 8) Later the Pharisees, or Scribes, the copyists of the Hebrew Bible changed the words around in the verse that says that because it was such an offensive concept to them. They changed it to say they shoved the shoot, cross, filthy idol in their own noses. They did that in a lot of places but for some reason it is traditionally referred to as 18 emendations. The Tiqqun Soferim or emendations/corrections of the scribes. They aren't corrections, though. Not really. They are distortions.
Anyway, you have to have studied for years as I have in order to correctly understand the importance and accuracy of what the Bible says. You also have to take into account a lot of other things. When you say things like "God is love" or "God is all powerful" the Bible may appear to say or actually say those things but to know the true meaning is important. Not the traditions of men. Or loathsome religion.
You can think of it like this. It's like a child insisting that man evolved from an ape to a professor of evolution. A lot of people may not understand that man is an ape, he didn't evolve from an ape - the kid may have heard that often. But it's wrong.
No it isn't. It's nonsense. First of all, the Bible described the shape of earth, the hydrologic cycle, and the need for washing hands anywhere from 700 to thousands of years before science, so "science" would have disagreed with the scientifically accurate descriptions given at the time. What you really mean is the Bible is stupid and science isn't. Which is also nonsense. You're only an ideologue who knows virtually nothing about what the Bible says.
@PathwayMachine The bibke describes the Earth as being circular, which is what you see looking at the horizon from a hilltop - it says nothing about a sphere (let alone an oblate spheroid). Water falls down so water must have gone up. Water flows down so eventually gets to the ocean. Two observations - far from detailing (or even understanding) the hydrologic cycle. Hand washing was prescribed for expiating sins before bringing offerings to priests. Nothing to do with hygiene. While some magical entity was busy slaying and murdering and punishing it might have been helpful if it had said, ohm, by the way, you're on a sphere going around and around that big shiny nuclear reactor in the sky.
