Now is this by chance or design ?

[Micilin]

You mean dawkins?
Guess what? He believes in a creator and has admitted this in interviews.

If you had researched him properly you would already know this.

Dearie me.

How about researching 'straw man' and other fallacious arguments.

I never mentioned Dawkins.

You can do better than this, surely, as it would be nice to be challenged.

 

[Norcon]

Well dawkins is your god so it seems a good place to start.

 

[EddieM]

"All the clever people are theists" Somewhat bold claim.. and no I don't claim to be clever.

Bold indeed, as the presence of just one clever atheist proves it wrong.

Which is what many people struggle with the concept of 'proof' as required by science.

Science can't prove anything, it merely puts forward models for what we can observe by experiment. Theories are there to be disproved.

 

[Dextraneous]

Theories rely upon axioms. Whether there is a creator or not is of little interest. What is of interest is what's the point of believing or denying it?

If there is a creator, then what is the value of it, since religions are man made?

 

[Micilin]

Well dawkins is your god so it seems a good place to start.

I thought you could do better, honestly.


Find me one post I have made that can back that statement up.

 

[Micilin]

Science can't prove anything, it merely puts forward models for what we can observe by experiment. Theories are there to be disproved.

Indeed, hence my use of "concept of 'proof' "

 

[breadnbutter]

so the suns a bit volatile,due to fusion, hasent killed us yet, so someone knew it would shoot out sometimes, and a guard is in place.

So : Rather than engineer the sun to be a constant source of energy, this 'someone' made it volatile. At the same time they'knew' it would sometimes shoot out, so they then had to engineer a guard system to counteract this flaw?

what makes you think its ,flawed,jst becuase it bursts out a bit of flare,so to speak, if you paint the door of your house to protect it from the weather,does that mean your door is flawed.

If you make something that then needs fixing in order to stop the planet frying ( or whatever), then it is flawed. Logic. Would you describe the initial setup , without a guard, as 'perfect' then?



If I was god and could make my front door from any material, I would use one that did not need maintenance, or be affected by weather.

who said it was a fix, its there becuase it looks like it was needed. but you only know becuase of todays technology, but before that it hasent coursed a problem. thank fully the sun has been realiable, its a never ending energy source,whithout the need for maintanence.
something flawed means it does not work. the sun works perfectly,for wat it does.

but even a pvc door has a coating to protect it from ultra voilet light.

 

[Micilin]

BnB - why make it volatile then have to make an adjustment to cater for the volatility?
Surely , knowing in advance that volatility would require some kind of guard system, the creator would just engineer for stability in the first place.

Looks like we have to call it a fix if we use your description of the process.

 

[Norcon]

How can a thermo nuclear reaction be stable?
God doesn't do magic.

 

[Micilin]

God doesn't do magic.

Indeed.

Any luck with the previous challenge?

 

[Brigadier]

How can a thermo nuclear reaction be stable?
God doesn't do magic.

Look into the clear, daytime sky - isn't the sun itself evidence enough of a stable thermonuclear reaction?

Or perhaps some reactions are not stable, but the evidence of those is clearly long gone. The ones that remain are, by necessity, stable.

 

[EddieM]

You're here because of the way it panned out not the other way Around. You are only less than a one in 200 million chance anyway. The odds for all of this are mind blowingly small.

 

[Micilin]

You're here because of the way it panned out not the other way Around. You are only less than a one in 200 million chance anyway. The odds for all of this are mind blowingly small.

Do we really know the odds if we are dealing in such huge numbers of planets/systems (even universes)?

Perhaps with the numbers involved it is more likely that this situation will occur at least once, than never to occur at all?

 

[Mikefromlondon]

If we believe or we predict that there must also be other worlds in existence somewhere out there, yet you folks don't belive in UFO's, so you guys contardict. And science also contaradicts lots of things, as much of it is based on asumption.
Of course the Earth must have been created perfect with its ability to defend against dedely flares rays from the sun, since sun must do what it is doing and its behaviour is not a steady patteren so the creater could not have perfected it any more than it already is, and how like the seasons we get in a year, likewise it may have been designed to do some other cycle too, like magnetic pole reversal etc.

 

[wobs]

You mean dawkins?
Guess what? He believes in a creator and has admitted this in interviews.

If you had researched him properly you would already know this.

Looking forward to the evidence for this one.