Replies

"Which logical fallacy are you talking about? You use the term “non sequitur” like it was a mantra."

OK, lets look at the definition of non sequitur

"Non sequitur is Latin for "it does not follow." In formal logic, an argument is a non sequitur if its conclusion does not follow from its premises."

example: If A is true, then B is true

Now, lets look at just one of your "evidences".

"We exist, therefore we were created. It is therefore reasonable to deduce the existence of a creator."

If A (We exist) Then B (we were created). That is a non sequitur. Just because A is true does not make B true as well.

Lets look at the definition of argument from ignorance (subtype argument from incredulity).

"The argument from personal incredulity, also known as argument from personal belief or argument from personal conviction, refers to an assertion that because one personally finds a premise unlikely or unbelievable, the premise can be assumed not to be true, or alternately that another preferred but unproved premise is true instead."

Now lets look at another of your claims.

"Life is too complex to have simply sprung up from random forces"

Because you can't imagine how it could have "sprung up from random forces" you claim that it must be otherwise. You provide ZERO evidence to support your claim that it is "too complex", you just wave your hand and pronounce it so.

Note: this is also a strawman since the ToE does not cover the origin on life and "random forces" in the form of mutations are arguably the least important force at work in evolution and you ignore natural selection. Thereby creating a weak strawman version of that which you claim to be arguing against.

"If it is impossible for life to have formed from a random process, a priori it must have been the result of a guided process."

OK, it appears you really want to move from The Theory of Evolution to The Origin of Life so lets do it.

What hypothesis are you trying to argue against that says life arose from "a random process" and what is your evidence that this is impossible.

[[You provide ZERO evidence to support your claim that it is “too complex”, you just wave your hand and pronounce it so]]

The evidnece to support that claim is seen in 150 years worth of exploring the issue and coming up empty with an answer

[[ToE does not cover the origin on life]]

Actually yeah it does, what it doesn’t put much effort into is how that origin was sparked. Evolution is the study of higher and higher taxonomy- this includes the very first form all the way to present day species

[[”Life is too complex to have simply sprung up from random forces”]]

It’s actually a very good argument and one thta is used in science all the time to determine if objects that are discovered have a designer or not. As you know, natural forces can shape natural objects so that they rawly resemble manmade structures, but noone would mistake a column of rock for the empire state building- The Empire building is much too complex to have randomly been formed by nature- it has the classic tell-tale signs of design

[[What hypothesis are you trying to argue against that says life arose from “a random process” and what is your evidence that this is impossible]]

What is your objective evidence that it could arise from random process?

[If A (We exist) Then B (we were created). That is a non sequitur...]

Only if you are willing to dismiss the premise, out of hand. Which you apparently are. Or, if you control the definition of “created,” which you cannot hope to do, in any reasonable discussion.

[Because you can’t imagine how it could have “sprung up from random forces” you claim that it must be otherwise. You provide ZERO evidence to support your claim that it is “too complex...]

There is ample proof that life couldn’t have been a spontaneous occurrance, you just haven’t seen it. I can’t imagine why not. Look up abiogenesis, it will furnish some extremely good proof. My error was in assuming your knowledge was as complete as you seem to think it is.

Take another freshman course in philosophy, you could use a refresher.