Confusing mice with mousetraps

So you think that mankind is the reason the universe exists? We have no means of seeing the unseen, at least the telescopes are looking at the real world. When we are young, fathers seem all-powerful, then we transfer the belief to an all-powerfull cosmic daddy.

Yes, it seems to me that if we could detect design, that would mean that the designer had someting in comon with us.

Does that mean that it is perfectly OK to lie so long as nobody finds out?
That sounds a bit messed up to me.

I was being facetious. When examining or declaring something to be a lie, one is thus assuming a source of truth.
Human wisdom is NOT the origen of truth.
God is truth.
Human wisdom can deny God, yet cannot replace Him as a source of truth.
Only an all knowing source can illuminate forth an all knowing wisdom.This message has been edited by Phatboy, 05-02-2005 01:12 PM

Yes I know. So was I. Seriously though, it really doesn't make much sense that God would deliberately deceive us that way.
If the world was created last Thursday at 4pm (eastern sea-board) then all of history is a complete fabrication, the bible included.
It means that Jesus didn't die for our sins. We are just being told that he did when in fact none of it ever happened. That is a bare faced lie in anybody's book and makes a total mockery of everything that ever happened.I just don't buy that as an option. AdminNosy: This train of thought has a chance of derailing this thread. Please don't continue with it.This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 05-03-2005 11:25 AM

I don't believe that we can directly detect design
in objects that we KNOW have been designed by other
humans.So commonality with the supposed designer is irrelevant.

I'm having a hard time understanding this post, do you mean we can't know that the great pyramid is designed?

Yes.Just by looking at an artifact we cannot say that
it was designed. We assume design based upon experience
of designed objects, but that's not the same as formally
determining that something was designed.We assume that the great pyramid was designed since it conforms
to our knowledge of 'designed' buildings/structures. It is composed
of blocks (which we know are used by people in construction) and
possibly we can still detect some tool marks on the stones.It's still an assumption not a strict determination. It requires
KNOWLEDGE that such things ARE designed.

Where would we gain this knowledge? From the pyramid, I would think.With the bar this high, how can you prove anything is designed?This message has been edited by DHA, 08-12-2005 05:47 PM

I disagree. We can tell that it was designed by anumber of ways. First of all, the shape and location of the blocks.. and the fact that the origin of the blocks is not from the site where the pyramids reside.

And the fact that it is a pyramid; not to many natural ones.

You cannot prove that anything is designed.

I thought I already said that.We infer design from knowledge of similar things that
we KNOW were designed.Without knowledge of similar design there would be nothing
to (objectively) identify anything as designed or not.

Do you mean by "prove", proof in the mathematical sense? What if teleonomy* gave a logical structure that matched a cellullar automata class statistically ruled first by things NOT biologically subect to natural selection and enabled a human to construct an axiom system that futhermore logically connected the form of both the math(s) and the sorting of alternative alleles??*

quote:

---

Teleonomy would not be a branch of the study of evolution. Its first concern with biological phenomenon would be to answer the question: "What is its function?"

---

GCWILLIAMS Adapation and Selection 1966.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 08-15-2005 07:55 AM

Ask Percy about this site, he designed it.