If i tell you that any of the apparent design you saw in the universe was not the work of god... [Spirituality & Religion]

@Speedyman Well there has been lots written about that possibility.

@Speedyman ‘apparent’ as in ‘the uninformed might easily fool themselves into assuming that some magical entity had designed it’.

That kind of ‘apparent’.

Words words words which mean nothing. You seem to specialise in Them @newjaninev2

@Speedyman

Yes, apparent design.
Now did you have something to say relevant to the subject of this thread or....?

More words you read from some fool off the internet who didn’t understand them either@Pikachu

@Speedyman Well, put forward a reason why you think we are wrong. Or is that too difficult for you?

So design is apparent when it's Obvious it happened. What logic is that? Hamlet was only apparently written by Shakespeare - it really wrote itself. Same twisted logic. @Bushranger

@Speedyman

lol so no, no you [i]don't[/i] have anything to add. You're just here to sling insults like a monkey throwing it's feces.

Imagine my surprise😏

Get a life and stop obsessing over me😂

@Speedyman [quote]So design is apparent[/quote]

What is ‘apparent’ is the driver of design. Creationists make the fallacious assumption that because a watch requires an intelligence to design it, then everything requires an intelligence.

There’s no intelligence behind Natural Selection (it’s a function of biological reality) yet it acts as a mechanism to deliver what creationists feel is design that must have been delivered by some sort of purposeful, goal-oriented intelligence.

They seek to add an unnecessary complication to a naturally-occurring process.

@Speedyman [quote][Hamlet was only apparently written by Shakespeare - it really wrote itself[quote]

You aren't serious, are you? I think it's obvious that I was referring to the debate regarding the authorship of Shakespeare's works. But such a response is expected from you.

No you obsess over being noticed like a child. Stop acting like one @Pikachu

Silly words words words. Meaningless! @newjaninev2

@Bushranger you are pretty dim if you think that

@Speedyman Did I say I believed it? I pointed out that a debate has been going on about the authorship of Shakespeare's works. The idea was to point out that there are, usually, more than one hypothesis regarding the origins of most things.

Yes but only one is right@Bushranger

@Speedyman True, but which one? I personally believe that Shakespeare wrote everything attributed to him, however, if someone presented conclusive, irrefutable proof that Christopher Marlowe was the actual author, then I would be obliged to alter my belief. Just as if you could provide the same level of evidence for your belief in creation and God, I would be obliged to change my current position.

Yes but there is absolutely no evidence for atheism@Bushranger

@Speedyman What evidence would you expect? It's a lack of belief, not a belief. I don't believe in invisible orange unicorns, so I'm not really going to bother about trying to prove their existence or lack thereof. If someone tells me they do believe in invisible orange unicorns, it would be incumbent upon them to prove it.

Actually, I suppose that Atheism could be seen as relying on a lack of evidence. I'd be interested to hear other's feeling about that concept.

@Speedyman In fact, 'atheism' is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a 'non-astrologer' or a 'non-alchemist'. We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.
[i]Sam Harris[/i]

If you believe Sam Harris you will believe anybody! What a plonker! 🤣@newjaninev2

@Speedyman In the quote I posted, Sam Harris isn’t asking you to believe him. He’s pointing out the absurdity of your statement that there’s 'no evidence for atheism’.

I’m glad Sam Harris isn’t asking me to believe him because he is quite absurd@newjaninev2