Intelligent Design

[Iacchus]

You never know, the Church of the Great Arkleseizure could be right and we were sneezed out of a nose.

You must be pretty adept at hanging on the wall then, huh?

 

[kmortis]

Well, how is it possible for something to exist prior to its inception, unless it were "planned" that way? Is this something nature is capable of doing of its own accord? Or, is nature merely a by-product of the same process?

I think the point here is that you seem to attribute that plan to a deity of some sort. (As I have little evidence to the contrary, I can only assume that it's some flavor of the Judeao-Christian Godhead, although certain parts of your espoused philosophy puts you more in line with some of the weirder Pagan faiths that I've run across)

Most of the rest of us would attribute that plan to the DNA-RNA script. No supernatural effort necessary.

If your point is that you God wrote the DNA-RNA scripts then we cannot really have a discussion. You do see that right? You believe in a god, I (and quite a few others) don't. Since you cannot possibly give clear evidence of a being fitting the descriptions of a god, it isn't really a fruitfull discussion, is it? We will probably never convince you that you are wrong, and vice versa.

Now, if you want to discuss what procedural steps were taken to get to various parts of the Universe's evolution, then we can talk. If, OTOH, you're going to offer nothing but badly parsed analogies, then go, take a rudimentary class in rhetoric, achieve a passing grade, and come back. That way we can actually discuss salient points, rather than spending four pages trying to decypher your thought process.

 

[Mercutio]

Just curious, Iacchus: on a scale of 0 to 100, how convinced are you that your view of the origins of the universe is correct?

 

[kmortis]

No, I'd be quite content to stick with the Universal Seed.

Careful with that stuff, it's been shown to cause cancer in labratory rats.

 

[Tricky]

No, I'd be quite content to stick with the Universal Seed.

I doubt you will. It wasn't too long ago that you were touting the sun as the source of everything. The Universal Seed is just your bad analogy du jour. You can't even stay faithful to your own BS.

 

[Mercutio]

I doubt you will. It wasn't too long ago that you were touting the sun as the source of everything. The Universal Seed is just your bad analogy du jour. You can't even stay faithful to your own BS.

It was all part of the same moment.

 

[Iacchus]

I think the point here is that you seem to attribute that plan to a deity of some sort. (As I have little evidence to the contrary, I can only assume that it's some flavor of the Judeao-Christian Godhead, although certain parts of your espoused philosophy puts you more in line with some of the weirder Pagan faiths that I've run across)

And, as I have suggested, it all comes from the same place.

Most of the rest of us would attribute that plan to the DNA-RNA script. No supernatural effort necessary.

Which, of course is merely a result of "random" processes.

If your point is that you God wrote the DNA-RNA scripts then we cannot really have a discussion. You do see that right? You believe in a god, I (and quite a few others) don't. Since you cannot possibly give clear evidence of a being fitting the descriptions of a god, it isn't really a fruitfull discussion, is it? We will probably never convince you that you are wrong, and vice versa.

Yet I see God as pure genius, and it's this genius that we're discussing when we discuss the laws of phyics and nature. And, while I may not be quite prepared to go into as much detail as you would like (like you and your notions about God, I see no need to), I still don't deny that it exists.

Now, if you want to discuss what procedural steps were taken to get to various parts of the Universe's evolution, then we can talk. If, OTOH, you're going to offer nothing but badly parsed analogies, then go, take a rudimentary class in rhetoric, achieve a passing grade, and come back. That way we can actually discuss salient points, rather than spending four pages trying to decypher your thought process.

And you've got it all wrong.

 

[Upchurch]

Well, if you planted a seed in the soil, and gave it a little water and some sunshine, and nothing happened, you might have a point.

I think that is the dumbest non-sequitor I have ever heard. It isn't even relevent to what we were talking about. Do you want to try again, or is this the best you can do?

 

[Iacchus]

I doubt you will. It wasn't too long ago that you were touting the sun as the source of everything. The Universal Seed is just your bad analogy du jour. You can't even stay faithful to your own BS.

Then might I suggest you guard yourself from taking things "too literally?" Sheesh, talk about the fundamentalists!

 

[Mercutio]

And you've got it all wrong.

Well, no. He may not understand what you mean, but that was a fairly accurate assessment of the form in which you present it.

 

[Taffer]

So, now yer pulling in Yggdrasil?
Next you're going to tell me that the entire universe is made from Ymir's piece-parts, eh?

Best post all night. Thank you, Kormtis.

 

[Iacchus]

I think that is the dumbest non-sequitor I have ever heard. It isn't even relevent to what we were talking about. Do you want to try again, or is this the best you can do?

Does the wisdom of the designer go into the design which he forms out of the clay?

 

[Mercutio]

Does the wisdom of the designer go into the design which he forms out of clay?

Metaphorically or literally? Yes, and no, respectively.

 

[Iacchus]

Best post all night. Thank you, Kormtis.

Wow! We must be on a totally different tangient then!

 

[Tricky]

Well, no. He may not understand what you mean, but that was a fairly accurate assessment of the form in which you present it.

Welll, except for the part about Iacchus having "thought processes".

 

[Taffer]

Which, of course is merely a result of "random" processes.

How are they random processes?

 

[pgwenthold]

All you need do is look at the branches on a tree, where one thing stems from the next. Yet it's all inherent in the wisdom contained within a single seed.

So how does a tree that has been spliced off from a branch from another tree know how to grow? That tree could not have had all the wisdom of the seed that led to anything.

Moreover, are you suggesting that the seed for the vine that wraps around the boards on my deck all the time knows that it will wrap the vine around the deck?

What about those plants that grow toward sunlight? That leaning can't be inherent in the seed because it depends on the sun.

 

[Iacchus]

How are they random processes?

Why don't you ask kmortis to explain it to you? ... Or, perhaps Merc?

 

[Mercutio]

...because we have given it more thought that Iacchus has...

 

[Iacchus]

So how does a tree that has been spliced off from a branch from another tree know how to grow? That tree could not have had all the wisdom of the seed that led to anything.

Moreover, are you suggesting that the seed for the vine that wraps around the boards on my deck all the time knows that it will wrap the vine around the deck?

What about those plants that grow toward sunlight? That leaning can't be inherent in the seed because it depends on the sun.

You really don't get it do you? It's all part of what it's been "programmed" to do.