[AndrewC]

Not interested in answering the question? It takes us right to the heart of the issue. I can't imagine why you're reluctant ... ;-)

I've answered you multiple times. You can't see the answer. I understand. I thought you were one of those that saw the pattern in the SIRDS but could not see the image in the SIRDS. I now doubt my assessment. You may not even see the dots.

[ConsistentLibertarian]

You didn't answer. You dodged. But let's go with the dodge. Question: What should one infer about origins from evidence of imperfect design if one wants one's beliefs to track the available evidence. Your answer: An imperfect person should infer that the designer is imperfect. OK. Hard to see why you add that only imperfect people should reason in this way. But suppose we let that slide. We're all imperfect, right? So on your view, we should conclude that the world was not created by God. Hence, anyone who fails to reach that conclusion is making a mistake. They are failing to reason as they should if they their beliefs to track the available evidence. What a strong indictment of fundamentalist christianity. You'd better watch yourself.

[Condorman]

You are here.