Even if there was a Designer, does it matter?

Again, just utter nonsense.Nothing in there support any value to the designer.You seem to be conflating the object with some designer. If something breaks if it falls 40 feet, does it matter whether it was designed to break in a 40 foot fall or just breaks in a 40 foot fall because the chemical and physical properties of the component parts came together through evolving naturally?What is the value of the designer. Does it matter if the designer is Loki, Coyote, Yahweh, or Tom Thumb?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

That still does not explain the value of the designer.The issue relates to the concept of Intelligent Design.Even if there was some Intelligent Designers, does it matter?Does it matter who designed the first radio or automobile or plane or train or box or match or button?Other than the two areas I outline, does the designer actually matter?Edited by jar, : hit send key too soon.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

How does it matter? They exist. They exist whether there was a designer or not.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

They do exist. We can verify that.Just like living things and rocks and trees.We happen to know that radios as one example, were designed, but only because the radio is a creation of human beings.But the question is, since we know they do exist, does the designer even matter for any reason other than as a historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

I did answer the question. We know they exist regardless of whether or not they were designed.Nor is there any evidence that "IF nothing can exist without the designer then the designer matters." Well, we certainly know that the radio can exist even if not designed. We know that mobility can exist even if not designed.The two specific items though we know were designed, but again, I see no reason that even in that case the designer is of any relevance other than as an historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits.Edited by jar, : appalin spallin

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

HUH?You want evidence that it does not matter? You do know how things work in a debate or discussion don't you? HUH?You do know that we discovered that stars and other objects produce radio before computers didn't you? And I responded that we know that automobiles are designed. But again, does the designer matter? HUH?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Glad you asked. In Message 8 of the thread "INTELLIGENT DESIGN: An Engineer's Approach" I pointed out some tests.I can repeat them here for you.

quote:

---

There is also the fact that the designer is too stupid to adopt good ideas.

​

Consider cars. There are many species or kinds of cars, Packard, Ford, Chevy, Mercedes, Humber, DKW, AutoUnion, Alfa Romeo, Citroen just as there are many kinds of mammals, lions, tigers, bears, man, orangutan, elephant, horse and of course, ohmys.

​

The difference between something designed, like cars, and those things that are not designed like mammals though can be seen in the difference in how good ideas do not propagate through out the living species or kinds.

​

In the early 1920s power windshield wipers appeared on the first car. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

​

In 1923 the first standard equipment radio appeared. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

​

In 1939, Buick introduced turn signals. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

​

The list is almost endless.

​

* electric wipers instead of vacuum.
* internal combustion engines.
* radial tires.
* heaters.
* air conditioning.
* roll down windows.
* headlights.
* mirrors.
* steering wheels.
* tops.
* spare tires.
* space saver spares.
* starters.
* the change from generator to alternator.

​

I could go on but that list should give you an idea.

​

In each instance this was a new feature that first appeared in only one make, sometimes only one model of a car. The designer though took good ideas from one model and applied those same ideas to EVERY model.

​

We do not see that when we look at examples of living critters. The humans brain is not then repeated in all mammals, the eagles eyes are not then repeated in all animals, good features, advances do not get incorporated across all the makes and models, species or kind, of mammals.

​

Looking at living critters what we find is NOT Intelligent Design.

---

In fact, what we do find is not design but rather whatever is just barely good enough to get by.But even here the issue remains, even where we can see design, other than as an historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits, does the designer matter?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

More unsupported assertion that is just totally unrelated to the topic.You asked for an example of a test, and I provided one.If life was designed why don't we see what we do see in things we do know are designed?But even here the issue remains, even where we can see design, other than as an historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits, does the designer matter?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

LOLCommunication is irrelevant.Long long ago and far far away when I was building my first few radios I broadcast every night. Seldom had the speaker hooked up since it was after I was supposed to be asleep so I never knew if I communicated with anyone.BUT ...that is also irrelevant, just as with autos, other than the two areas I mentioned, as an historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits, does it matter if there was a designer?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Does it matter what the designers purpose was?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

But again, what does "live life so as to fulfill that purpose" have to do with the question asked in the topic? Should I only use a tool as the designer intended? Can I use a radio as a pedestal base for a lamp or a hammer as a door stop?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

when Ringo asked for a test did you not ask for him to provide one first? See Message 113.I provided a test: "If there was a designer we would see good ideas propagate throughout the models, if there is not a designer we should see "just good enough" critters that do not incorporate good ideas from other models."I'll repeat it here so you don't have to look it up in Message 116.

quote:

---

There is also the fact that the designer is too stupid to adopt good ideas.

​

Consider cars. There are many species or kinds of cars, Packard, Ford, Chevy, Mercedes, Humber, DKW, AutoUnion, Alfa Romeo, Citroen just as there are many kinds of mammals, lions, tigers, bears, man, orangutan, elephant, horse and of course, ohmys.

​

The difference between something designed, like cars, and those things that are not designed like mammals though can be seen in the difference in how good ideas do not propagate through out the living species or kinds.

​

In the early 1920s power windshield wipers appeared on the first car. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

​

In 1923 the first standard equipment radio appeared. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

​

In 1939, Buick introduced turn signals. Within only a few years they were found on every car.

​

The list is almost endless.

​

* electric wipers instead of vacuum.
* internal combustion engines.
* radial tires.
* heaters.
* air conditioning.
* roll down windows.
* headlights.
* mirrors.
* steering wheels.
* tops.
* spare tires.
* space saver spares.
* starters.
* the change from generator to alternator.

​

I could go on but that list should give you an idea.

​

In each instance this was a new feature that first appeared in only one make, sometimes only one model of a car. The designer though took good ideas from one model and applied those same ideas to EVERY model.

​

We do not see that when we look at examples of living critters. The humans brain is not then repeated in all mammals, the eagles eyes are not then repeated in all animals, good features, advances do not get incorporated across all the makes and models, species or kind, of mammals.

​

Looking at living critters what we find is NOT Intelligent Design.

---

Looking at the evidence what we see is what would be expected if there was no designer.

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

What in that list is more than an historic footnote?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Well, look at the evidence.We don't really know who the inventor or designer of the first radio is, we certainly don't know who the designer of almost anything we use is. It might be interesting and so worth a foot note that for example Harvey Earl introduce tail fins and that the first concept car that lead to the Corvette was originally "Project Opel".Stuff like that is interesting but just a footnote.I have a friend who is one of those inveterate tinkerers. He seems to always find new uses for stuff, things that certainly were not the intended use of the products designer.Sure it might be interesting to know who really designed the first radio or phone or car or train or baby bottle, but does it really matter if the first radio was designed by Lodge or Popov or Dolbear or Tesla or Marconi or ... ?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

Stop and actually think.You asked for a test. I presented a test. It doesn't matter whether or not you agree with anything or think something is stupid, it is a test.If you have another test propose it and we will take a look at it. HUH?Again, how is one living cell more complex than the Space Shuttle? What is your measurement tool for complexity?And yes, of course, the Space Shuttle was just barely good enough to get by most of the time, but it also is an example of design just like the cars, and we can see many of the aspects I outlined above as well as the known limitations of those things designed by humans.But you are still not addressing the issue.The issue remains, even where we can see design, other than as an historical footnote or in the case of product liability suits, does the designer matter?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!