Of course, we know who is responsible for Mount Rushmore, but even someone who had never heard of the monument could recognize it as designed.
Posted on 02/09/2005 7:55:00 PM PST by bondserv
Still, some critics claim that science by definition can't accept design, while others argue that science should keep looking for another explanation in case one is out there. But we can't settle questions about reality with definitions, nor does it seem useful to search relentlessly for a non-design explanation of Mount Rushmore. Besides, whatever special restrictions scientists adopt for themselves don't bind the public, which polls show, overwhelmingly, and sensibly, thinks that life was designed. And so do many scientists who see roles for both the messiness of evolution and the elegance of design.
(Excerpt) Read more at discovery.org ...
Thanks for the ping!
We can't reproduce it... yet. You just don't have faith in mankind's creativity and ingenuity, don't you?
Please read post 19.
Not being able to reproduce it "yet" means we can't make it happen without engineering, which is what I state two lines later.
And if we have to be "creative" and have "ingenuity" wouldn't that STILL support that life HAS to be designed?
The only way science can even step up to the plate and take a true swing at the existance of something more than us is if they can present a case where life came from not only non-life, but also without planning.
Evolution is the fairy tale.
Which is more simplistic, to believe that something was created from nothing by nothing for nothing or that everything was created by SOMEONE? If creation is simplistic it is because evolution is impossible.
Has the scientific community been able to create on purpose what it claims was created by accident? The answer is clearly NO.
I watched a show about ocean searchs for ancient civilizations and the explorer said that the first thing that they look for when they examine underwater images is right angles because they don't exist naturally in nature. If right angles provide evidence for the existence of ancient civilizations then what are we if not evidence for a benevolent all-powerful creator?
Poing.
Life came from non-life. Look it up. Anyway, it's common knowledge that amino acids can be produced in a lab. Amino acids are the building blocks of life since all of the approximately 40,000 different types of proteins found in the human body are made from only 20 amino acids. So, it is a matter of time before gen. engineers or biochemists will be able to create the first artificial cells.
Prove the existence of that SOMEONE. ;)
Again, yes, amino acids can be created. Is that life? NO!
If life came from non-life, please, show me.
"Prove the existence of that SOMEONE. ;)"
Prove life came from nothing.
Actually, yes it would. If you can show me life coming from nothing by a non-intelligent means, that would rock my world.
Look at the composition of the amino acids. By themselves they are not a living organism. So life is, in essence, made of non-life. Anyway, science has its boundaries. And this boundaries are constantly shifting as mankind is disovering and inveting. 100 years ago space travel was just a phantasy. I admit that biochemistry has it shortcomings because we are still in the process of learning and exploring.
Science is a dynamic discipline. As I mentioned in a prior post, 100 years ago dreaming about space travel was a matter for sci-fi authors and lunatics. Same rules apply for advanced organic chemistry.
"So life is, in essence, made of non-life. "
We've been here. We exist in the same realm as non-life. Congrats. Now get to answering my question: Can life COME from now-life (not be MADE OF, but COME from it.)?
"Anyway, science has its boundaries. And this boundaries are constantly shifting as mankind is disovering and inveting."
We could possibly invent life sometime in the future. You know what though? It still means life requires design to exist.
"ok..and I'll wait for Rapture."
According to science, the end of existance will come before life comes from nothing. So go ahead.
Of course, we know who is responsible for Mount Rushmore, but even someone who had never heard of the monument could recognize it as designed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.