Skip to comments.
Who Designed the Designer?
Science and Theology News ^
| 2006
| Richard Dawkins
Posted on 01/08/2006 3:02:31 PM PST by tpeters
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 641-644 next last
1
posted on
01/08/2006 3:02:34 PM PST
by
tpeters
To: tpeters
Who designed the designer? The designer. And don't tell me that doesn't make sense to science, since they buy into Quantum Physics just fine.
2
posted on
01/08/2006 3:03:46 PM PST
by
bnelson44
(Proud parent of a tanker! (Charlie Mike, son))
To: tpeters
Or, on the other side of the argument, where did the stuff that formed the Universe come from?
3
posted on
01/08/2006 3:08:58 PM PST
by
atomicpossum
(If I don't reply, don't think you're winning. I often just don't bother to argue.)
To: tpeters
Design is not a real alternative to chance because it raises an even bigger problem who designed the designer? Natural selection is a real solution.
Under natural selection - what does the selecting?
4
posted on
01/08/2006 3:09:38 PM PST
by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all.)
To: PatrickHenry
5
posted on
01/08/2006 3:10:53 PM PST
by
dread78645
(Sorry Mr. Franklin, We couldn't keep it.)
To: tpeters
Until the designer is objectively measured. the concept of a designer is solely a matter of faith and not science.
6
posted on
01/08/2006 3:11:41 PM PST
by
Rudder
To: bnelson44
"And don't tell me that doesn't make sense to science, since they buy into Quantum Physics just fine."
If you're outside of time, there is no "before."
To: tpeters
Thats what natural selection is about. Its not a sudden all-or-nothing hitting of the jackpot. Its gradually getting warmer toward the jackpot, Under natural selection, who or what selects what is considered warmer and what is considered colder? And who or what decides what comprises the jackpot?
8
posted on
01/08/2006 3:11:56 PM PST
by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all.)
To: atomicpossum
Exactly!! Evolution has the same problem. Where did the first subatomic particle of "cosmic soup" come from and the force that "souped" it up. Idiotic. Even laws of physics defy evolution.
9
posted on
01/08/2006 3:12:34 PM PST
by
momincombatboots
(Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber)
To: Texas Eagle
"Under natural selection - what does the selecting?"
Basically complex physics and chemical reactions.
To: tpeters
One problem with natural selection being the answer. If you go back far enough and ask the question from where did that originate, you get one of two answers. 1) The uncaused cause or 2) We don't know, but as scientist we will investigate until we get the answer. In other words, they don't have to answer the questions, just put your faith in them. Kind of like all liberal answers: How much money is enough for education. Whatever it takes to educate. How much is that. We'll know when it's enough. How much money to end poverty. Whatever it takes. We'll know when it's enough. Just trust us. Put you faith in man, rather than some God you can't prove. If you ask the wrong questions, you will always get the wrong answers.
11
posted on
01/08/2006 3:12:52 PM PST
by
Tex52
To: tpeters
Who designed the designer? It start with "G", but ya can't say it cuz ya get kicked out of the schools.
12
posted on
01/08/2006 3:14:05 PM PST
by
Wolfie
To: tpeters
What existed before the Big Bang?
Since we do not know, I guess the Dover judge needs to declare Big Bang cosmology a fraud and make it unlawful to discuss it.,
13
posted on
01/08/2006 3:14:06 PM PST
by
JCEccles
To: Texas Eagle
Under natural selection - what does the selecting? Extinction, death, non-viability...the typical hostile forces of the universe.
And Pat Robertson.
14
posted on
01/08/2006 3:14:26 PM PST
by
Rudder
To: tpeters
15
posted on
01/08/2006 3:14:46 PM PST
by
Abcdefg
To: Lauretij2
Basically complex physics and chemical reactions.Basically complex physics. Just the sort of double-speak and contradiction-in-terms one must resort to to promote the concept of Unintelligent Happenstance.
16
posted on
01/08/2006 3:14:58 PM PST
by
Texas Eagle
(If it wasn't for double-standards, Liberals would have no standards at all.)
To: PatrickHenry; dread78645
17
posted on
01/08/2006 3:14:59 PM PST
by
M203M4
To: bnelson44
You bought into Quantum Physics too when you bought a CD player with its laser. You bought it with the transistors in the chip on your computer, or viewed a photo from the scanning tunneling microscope.
There is evidence for Quantum Physics. I have not a yet seen any for a talking snake, or found a nuclear chemical pathway that could take a woman and convert her to Sodium Chloride without blowing a chunk of the earth into space.
18
posted on
01/08/2006 3:15:47 PM PST
by
tpeters
To: Wolfie
Who designed the designer? It start with "G", but ya can't say it cuz ya get kicked out of the schools.Who designed God?
19
posted on
01/08/2006 3:16:21 PM PST
by
Rudder
To: momincombatboots
Even laws of physics defy evolution.You say this as if it were yet another outrage of reason. Except that no one, ever, anywhere, has argued that the laws of physics have evolved, in a process like natural selection.
20
posted on
01/08/2006 3:17:08 PM PST
by
coloradan
(Failing to protect the liberties of your enemies establishes precedents that will reach to yourself.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 641-644 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson