:-)

Regarding who designed the designer. To make it simple for you to understand this. If and only if we could find any empirical evidence of the designer, then we could talk about the designer of the designer. So here you really need to be agnostic about who designed the designer since we dont have any emprical evidence of the first designer!! This purely from scientific point of view. Because if we kept questioning any scientific discovery we have and if we failed to answer all these questions; then we wont have any science by your logic.
Therefore; any irrelevant question about our best explination wont really falsify it. To falsify a theory you need to show that its evidence is weak or by proving that alternative explinations can best explain the given phenomenon. And in our case, from the fine tuning argument and from DNA, we are justified to infer that there is a designer since evidence provided prove it.And I am not saying that we should stop asking questions for our best explination. We could ask such questions and hope that in the future we could find good evidence to answer it without the need to claim that our best explination is invalid.

Now how the theory of intelligent design works. It works in the same way as other fields use the concept of 'design detection'. You simply look for features that can only be best explained by design. Design detection is used in Archeology and in Search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI). in arechelogy for example, an archelogist would be able to differentiate between man made object and an object made by natural process. A man made object has certain features that can make us positive that its not made by some natural process. In SETI also we have the same concept being applied for design detection. Even though no extraterrestrials intelligencd has been detected. The methodology used in this science is scientific. The scientists are trying to find signals with certain pattern that can only be explained by intelligence.So what if we could find such features in the universe and on living beings? Can we deduce its the result of intelligence? Just look at the DNA and look at the fine fine tuning of our universe so you would know the answer.

Hi there

I'll be blunt regarding your "response" to the first point :

It isn't lack of information that makes us say "The Lord created it" , nay , it is the existence of information that makes us say so . The shocking order in the creation and the incredible adjustment be it in the cosmological constants , the living creatures , or in the Earth . So basically , you've been hitting a straw man .

And that's just the first point .

In reference to:




ARGUMENT 1. - ORDER IN THE UNIVERSE
So there is complexity in the universe. And we can't fully explain how it happened. People like me will simply say: "We don't know or we don't know everything about it". On the other hand, religious people will tend to use this as an argument for their deities: "You don't know how it happened? Well, god did it! Case closed".
First of all, lack of information shouldn't give anyone the upper hand. The difference between us here is that I admit I don't have answers for lots of such questions because I really don't have them. And you don't have them either, yet you don't want admit it.

A mobile phone is clearly something that was put together in an organised way, so it would be rational to believe that it must have an organiser. - now this statement is really weird. WE DON'T NEED TO BELIEVE THE PHONE HAS A CREATOR. WE KNOW IT, IT HAS LOADS OF EVIDENCE. YOU DON'T NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT SO MUCH. ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS ACCEPT IT AS A FACT, AS IF YOU STATE MEN DON'T MAKE MOBILES, PEOPLE WILL PROVE YOU WRONG.

It is also a fact that other objects or even ideas made by men are made by men, it is really that simple.
A man-made object requires a man.

But then you draw an analogy and say that a non-man-made object also requires a creator. This is actually not a fact. It is a belief. And what is it based on? On lack of knowledge. By claiming it was god you prove that you can't really explain how non-man-made things appear in the universe but you choose to avoid being honest in that case. After all, the intelligent design explanation is really something you and your fellows would love to hear as god believers.

And let me put another thing straight, you have a problem with the existence of the universe and its explanation or/and you have a problem with no god taking part in that existence, but you have no problem with god himself - a concept which is totally unprovable to be true in the first place, a concept that raises even more questions.



ARGUMENT 2 - BEGINNING OF THE UNIVERSE
Let me just quote stuff here.

Would you be satisfied with the answer that it (the universe) came from ‘nothing’ and it ‘just happened? - My satisfaction is irrelevant. I just care about what is true. Not about what would satisfy me more.

Imagine a sniper who has just found his target and calls back to base to get permission to shoot. The person at the base tells the sniper to hold on while they seek permission from someone else higher up. So the guy higher up seeks permission from the guy even higher up and so on and so on. If this goes on forever, will the sniper ever get to shoot the target? - Have you ever been outside the universe? Have you ever experienced the state before it came to being? Most likely not. Do you think the conditions of the state before the universe are equal to the ones within the universe? They probably weren't. So using the rules you know from within the universe doesn't make much sense. We don't even know what nothingness is and how it looks like or if it is possible to be there in the first place. All we can do is speculate. And there are many theories concerning the universe and its beginning. Compared to them the god explanation is just a baseless hypothesis.

All of these attributes of the first cause make up the basic concept of God. God is the uncreated first cause of the universe. - So you can't actually prove that god exists but you give attributes to him/her/it? It is like saying that unicorns are pink.



ARGUMENT 3 - Human Nature
Throughout the history of the world, the majority of people have believed in God. There seems to be something built in the human mind that makes us want to believe. - So what? It is a cultural-political thing. If you are born among believers, you are more likely to become one because you will hear from them that this is the correct choice to make. And you will likely trust them because they will be your family and friends. Especially in the past when people were really serious about their beliefs.
And different cultures borrowed from each other. Why making new ideas when you can take someone else's? We can see similarities between different ancient cultures, we know they actually did borrow ideas from each other altering them only according to their own agendas or ideas.

“The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development of children’s minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of intelligent being is behind that purpose…” - sure, humans, including kids, like order. And they like it because it makes thinking easier. It doesn't mean that all the rules and purposes we make up are actually work in reality.

Disbelief in God is something which is unnatural to the human being. - It is also not natural to go to the dentist, but we know that it is better if we do. It is not natural to use technology, technology is not a part of nature, we make it, but then it really works and it improves our lives. So non-natural ideas can bring better solutions and answers than other ideas.
It doesn't matter if it's natural, it should be logical.

“If we threw a handful [of children] on an island and they raised themselves…they would believe in God”. - That proves we are not rational by nature, especially in hard conditions or when we have no knowledge or little knowledge. It doesn't at any point prove god is somehow there and we just have a natural sense to spot it.
Also, kids as an example is not the best idea, because kids are usually way more gullible and simply stupider than adults, they are more willing to believe in anything you tell them, they tend to imagine things they can not differ from reality, they even watch cartoons and do that. Therefore it is easier to make a little kid a believer of something than an adult.



So the conclusions are:

1. WE MAY NOT HAVE AN ANSWER FOR SOMETHING, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN AT ANY POINT THAT GOD DID IT - and this is particularly awkward because you tend to introduce logic and science to the discussion, but then
your logic resides in lack of evidence.
2. YOU MAY HAVE ANSWERS FOR ALL THE MYSTERIES OF THE UNIVERSE, BUT THEY ARE USELESS UNLESS YOU CAN ACTUALLY PROVE THEM TO BE TRUE.
3. OUR REASONING IS NOT RATIONAL BY NATURE. IT CAN BE RATIONAL WHEN WE APPLY CONFIRMED INFORMATION TO IT. BELIEFS, MYTHS OR MYSTERIES ARE NOT AT STAKE.






Hey there, I was trying to respond to a post here but then instead of appearing under it:


it is instead here:


Sorry for the trouble.

Have a nice one!

not a problem
Write your response here

Hey there, I was trying to respond to a post here but then instead of appearing under it:


it is instead here:


Sorry for the trouble.

Have a nice one!

hello patryk
See this

i don't speak english
i use google traduction
I called friends talking english
please wait

Hello everyone, I was just invited here by a person who, I suppose, is your friend, to talk about religion. SO I AM NOT CHARLIE1965. My name is Patryk and I am from Poland. Another thing is Charlie's and my views are different. He believed there is no god, therefore he was a gnostic atheist. I, on the other hand, am an agnostic atheist - a person who doesn't believe in god since there is no evidence for it. Even though, I find the existence of god quite incredible, I don't make claims concerning god like: he exists OR he doesn't exist. I simply reject the concept and that's it.
This makes me represent the vast majority of atheists around the world. I have personally met just a few who claimed, like CHarlie, that there is no god and tried to put forward arguments or some proofs for that.
Because of the differences I mentioned, I believe we should start over with a new debate instead of continuing the old one.
Cheers!

مما التفت إليه نظري : ما في قلوب المسلمين من رأفة , فليتأمل مهابيل الإلحاد بشتى صنوفهم كيف كان ابن السنة ونور الدين وغيرهما يسعون جاهدين لإنقاذ هذا الشخص , والأخذ بيده نحو الهدى والنور , وكيف حزنوا حين تلقوا خبر وفاته , هذه الرحمة لا تجد لها محلا في ألئك المهبولين القاسية قلوبهم فهي كالأرض البور الخربة

أللهم ارزقنا حسن الخاتمه

لا حول ولا قوة إلاّ بالله .
أتمنى أن يكون قد أسلم دون نعرف , الآن فقط تحت الثرى تأكّد أن للكون خالقٌ مدبّرٌ خبير .
إنــّا لله وإنـّا إليه راجعون , اللهم ثبتنا وبلغنا اليقين , أحسن خاتمنا ياكريم .

عندما دخلت على الموقع المذكور

Leksands Fågelklubb, Bogdan är borta! In memoriam - Bogdan Persson 1965-2010

http://www.leksandsfagelklubb.se/bogdan_ar_borta.html

Leksands fågelklubb är en aktiv förening av fågelintresserade, såväl unga som äldre. Tillsammans driver vi många fågelprojekt i egen regi, men även i samarbete med andra klubbar och föreningar.

وقمت بالترجمة السريعة لنعرف من هو charli1965

Bogdan Persson - Bogdan is gone! In memoriam - Bogdan Persson 10.06.1965.-22.10.2010 . In Memoriam - Bogdan Persson 10.06.1965.-10.22.2010 .

الأسم : بوجدان بيرسسون

ولد في 10 يونيو 1965 في يوغسلافيا السابقة ( صربيا حاليا)


وهاجر الى السويد وعاش في مدينة Leksand في عام 1988









وكان من اهم هواياته التصوير الفوتوغرافي للطيور




وقد زار عدة دول في العالم لذاك الغرض




هذه الصورة اللتقطها في عام 2008 في تايلند

توفي في 22 اكتوبر 2010 عن عمر 45 سنة في احدى مستشفيات المدينة بمرض السرطان


وقد كنت من اوائل الذين تحاورا معه وكم تمنيت ان يرى الحق ويهتدي

ولكن قال الحق جل وعلى

((وَلَقَدْ ذَرَأْنَا لِجَهَنَّمَ كَثِيرًا مِنَ الْجِنِّ وَالْإِنْسِ لَهُمْ قُلُوبٌ لَا يَفْقَهُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ أَعْيُنٌ لَا يُبْصِرُونَ بِهَا وَلَهُمْ آَذَانٌ لَا يَسْمَعُونَ بِهَا أُولَئِكَ كَالْأَنْعَامِ بَلْ هُمْ أَضَلُّ أُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْغَافِلُونَ (179) )) الاعراف


وآخر دعوانا أن الحمدلله رب العالمين