tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post9187695180760469792..comments2023-10-29T08:19:51.395-05:00Comments on The Raytractors - Ray Comfort's Detractors: Open Challenge to CreationistsMacGyver Jrhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02307024564664964571noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-83028568573237521352008-08-14T09:56:00.000-05:002008-08-14T09:56:00.000-05:00Actually, I take my last comment back, there is an...Actually, I take my last comment back, there is an anti-evolution slant to it. It can be edited out, however, and then the article would present just the creation evidence.MonsterMongolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05956367832452503425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-30502561494972750562008-08-14T09:52:00.000-05:002008-08-14T09:52:00.000-05:00I'm no learned scientist myself, so I'm not able t...I'm no learned scientist myself, so I'm not able to start busting out with scientific answers with all the big words and such, but I know how to find a good article that is pro-creationsist (with evidence!) yet not anti-evolutionist. May I do a cut and paste job?MonsterMongolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05956367832452503425noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-83836524504593081532008-08-12T10:40:00.000-05:002008-08-12T10:40:00.000-05:00The motivation for Multiple Designer Theory (tm) w...The motivation for Multiple Designer Theory (tm) was to take the false but pervasive analogy with human-designed artifacts, and push it in a direction that creationists would find logical but horrifying. <BR/><BR/>They want a Designer, let's give them more than they want. This is not an original idea. The Romans, for example, even had names for their multiple Designers: Zeus, Diana, Cupid, Neptune, Venus, Bacchus, and many more.<BR/><BR/>A future project for MDT's research arm, the Creological Institute, is to name and classify at least some of the Designers. They could then be placed in a family tree, complete with begats.Olorinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05240133812210926831noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-69627166155626305532008-08-12T07:49:00.000-05:002008-08-12T07:49:00.000-05:00Olorin,You are are Poe-diatrist. :>Olorin,<BR/>You are are Poe-diatrist. :>Froggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12972110380349786742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-30297591327636540542008-08-12T05:22:00.000-05:002008-08-12T05:22:00.000-05:00olorin,well done. I was going to post before charl...olorin,<BR/>well done. I was going to post before charles did, but then I thought, what the fuck is he saying? He's just making the exact same claim with one changed sub-assertion, and it still makes no more sense. So I decided that this was just a little bit too strange to be the real deal. I knew someone would bite though.<BR/>I haven't tried to really Poe someone, so please tell me, does it hurt much to write that stuff?<BR/>I wont ask if the same in book length would make money, because we already know it does.felixhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00749925395851545703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-57351759382638380882008-08-11T21:02:00.000-05:002008-08-11T21:02:00.000-05:00No, Charles, you failed. You failed the exam on P...No, Charles, you failed. You failed the exam on Poe's Law. Sorry :-)Olorinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05240133812210926831noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-55510372437705907592008-08-11T16:16:00.000-05:002008-08-11T16:16:00.000-05:00olorin said: "It is truly and irrefutable obvious ...olorin said: <I>"It is truly and irrefutable obvious to anyone that everything that is complex and has a purpose is intelligently designed."</I><BR/><BR/>Stop. Do not pass Go. Do not collect $200.<BR/><BR/>Fail.<BR/><BR/>What justification do you have that anything in the natural world has a purpose? What's the purpose of the Grand Canyon? What's the purpose of an elephant? What's the purpose of Ray Comfort? (Don't answer that.)<BR/><BR/>This is one of the biggest logical fallicies that the anti-evolution (or should I say, anti-science and anti-reason) people fall for. By stating that anything in the natural world has a purpose (that is, a function that it was designed to fulfill), then you've already presupposed an outside entity that has determined that purpose. Do you get it? You're begging the question, in the same way that claiming that a creation requires a creator is begging the question. <BR/><BR/>Clear so far? The rest of your argument can be dismissed as your fundamental premise is unsupportable.Char'Elshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08257999516820029452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-17331131008080306272008-08-11T15:12:00.000-05:002008-08-11T15:12:00.000-05:00It is truly and irrefutable obvious to anyone that...It is truly and irrefutable obvious to anyone that everything that is complex and has a purpose is intelligently designed. One cannot look upon a car or an airplane and not appreciate that it was intelligently designed for a specific purpose. Therefore, life, which is far more complex than any human-designed artifact, must also be designed.<BR/><BR/>In addition, we know something else about complex, purposeful designs: They were all, every one, designed by large numbers of individual designers. Even small airplanes are designed by hundreds of people—dozens of people designed the engines, dozens designed the airframe structure, dozens more designed the instruments, the radio systems, the hydraulic controls, and the seats inside. Every living being is much more complex, and has more functions, than an airplane. Therefore, life was designed by thousands or even millions of different designers.<BR/><BR/>Positing a great number of designers sweeps away many of the problems with conventional intelligent design theory. Conventional ID has a hard time explaining predation: why some animals chase and eat other animals, why bacteria infect us with diseases. “Multiple designer theory” has an obvious answer. Just as, say, airplanes may be designed in one country to attack tanks designed in another country, lions, having been designed by one group of designers, wish to destroy antelope, which were designed by another group.. Why do different animals compete with each other for resources? For the same reason that Chryslers compete with Fords—because they were designed to do so by different intelligences. Why do plants and animals go extinct? Why do automobile models disappear, to be replaced by others? Because different designers have different ideas as to what will survive in the market, as in the environment. Because new designers invent new ways to design and manufacture them. Why were life forms simpler and fewer in the past than today? Because there were fewer designers, and they were not as proficient. <BR/><BR/>Darwinists claim that the similarity of features of different organism are evidence for common descent. Balderdash. When Boeing designs an airliner, it doesn’t design the engines. These are designed by specialists at General Electric or Rolls Royce, who then sell them to many different aircraft companies. In the same way, one group of designers may design, say, cellular ribosomes or bone structures or eye modules for use by the designers of different animals. This is why eyes are so similar in diverse animals. Why do we see vestigial organs? If only a single designer generated the plan for the entire animal, this would be considered incompetent. But suppose that one group of designers produces an intestinal tract, and shops it around to many other groups. The intestine designers must satisfy several different client designers. Thus, for example the appendix that is unnecessary in humans does have a function in other animals who can otherwise acquire the design. Many different kinds of digital watches all use exactly the same chip; the cheaper models merely leave certain of the chip’s features unconnected. .<BR/><BR/>Just as it is glaringly obvious that all life forms were intelligently designed, it is also obvious that different plants, animals, and their organs and cells were designed by multitudes of different designers. Further, this extension to intelligent-design theory has far more explanatory power than does the conventional ID variety having only a single vastly overworked intelligence.Olorinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05240133812210926831noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-63854979568970881892008-08-11T07:40:00.000-05:002008-08-11T07:40:00.000-05:00Fourkid,Of course you cannot follow the rules beca...Fourkid,<BR/>Of course you cannot follow the rules because there is no empirical evedence for your beliefs.Froggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12972110380349786742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-70440572626853260182008-08-10T19:23:00.000-05:002008-08-10T19:23:00.000-05:00Here's another top ten listThe Ten Commandments of...Here's another top ten list<BR/><A HREF="http://protolobsis.blogspot.com/2008/08/ten-commandments-of-debating-ray.html" REL="nofollow">The Ten Commandments of Debating Ray Comfort</A>Milohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12910886626220609245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-38809691130034837512008-08-10T17:47:00.000-05:002008-08-10T17:47:00.000-05:00Just so you know - I am not afraid to post - but i...Just so you know - I am not afraid to post - but it I can't follow the 4 rules, so I will refrain. <BR/>Blessings,<BR/>Pattifourkidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16396302386295985290noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-25985064169133766042008-08-10T16:19:00.000-05:002008-08-10T16:19:00.000-05:00Somewhat related, I stumbled onto The Christian St...Somewhat related, I stumbled onto <A HREF="http://community.livejournal.com/endcreationism/260243.html" REL="nofollow">The Christian Starter Kit</A> earlier.theaceofclubzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04288501494742324121noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-59927049014515669592008-08-10T16:04:00.000-05:002008-08-10T16:04:00.000-05:00Clos, now that you've explained that that way, I a...Clos, now that you've explained that that way, I am on my knees and have converted. I will have no more need for evils such as logic, science, and reasoning.nonmagichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12986030395050670437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-20481092976449626552008-08-10T10:20:00.000-05:002008-08-10T10:20:00.000-05:00I think we'd better had.I think we'd better had.Clostridiophilehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242245098663362751noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-57949764163639025782008-08-10T08:30:00.000-05:002008-08-10T08:30:00.000-05:00Gee, Clos, I now see the clear and 100% proof for ...Gee, Clos, I now see the clear and 100% proof for creationism.<BR/><BR/>We might as well shut this blog down.Froggiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12972110380349786742noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4140917903722388348.post-55830654516069491912008-08-10T07:59:00.000-05:002008-08-10T07:59:00.000-05:00Come on Dale, those hard working creationists have...Come on Dale, those hard working creationists have some great positive data:<BR/><BR/>1) creation requires a creator<BR/>2) coke cans don't accidentally form<BR/>3) banana's fit like a cock in the mouth<BR/>4) Jesus is Lord...and a bioengineer<BR/>5) The Bible says Jesus' dad created everything<BR/>6) The data is for everyone to see, creationists just interpret it right-the way Jesus intended.<BR/>7) Do you want to go to Hell?<BR/>8) I mean seriously, if you want to go to Hell, just believe in a non-creation lie.<BR/>9) Oh, you are going to Hell, evilutionist!Clostridiophilehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06242245098663362751noreply@blogger.com