CoolUsername:


Are you sure of what your saying? We tend to have far less individuals when a genetic mutation is failed. Also, are you implying that there isn't any variation within fossils of the same species?

There are few variations but these variations are never different from the type we see among species. Also, and more importantly, there are many fossils that are exactly similar to their living counterparts today they have to be explained away using the clock and bull story of evolutionary stasis. Lastly, if the theory were true we should see many living transitional species for a process that has been going on for billions of years. Not that you point to a viable species and call it transitional but a species with clear transitional features in place.

Teempakguy:

1. yes, if two people agree on the same premise, they will arrive at the same conclusion. however, theists and atheist do not agree on the same premise. this is the actual case.
1. The universe is of complex design.
2. All design must have designers.

3. All designers must have humanoid characteristics.

Atheists disagree with theists on 3. It is possible, and in fact, required to have a designer which does not have a humanoid characteristic. because the humanoid character is in itself, a design. and if all designers must be humanoid, then humanoid designers must require other humanoid designer. who in turn will require other humanoid designs.

2. Yes, they can be right to guess that it is made by a human.

Your statement lacks quality of logic. For statement to be logical it must be straight to to the point, use the problem as subject of the matter, simple and little sentences...if not it could be cumbersome and fail reasoning

Teempakguy:

1. yes, if two people agree on the same premise, they will arrive at the same conclusion. however, theists and atheist do not agree on the same premise. this is the actual case.
1. The universe is of complex design.
2. All design must have designers.

3. All designers must have humanoid characteristics.

Atheists disagree with theists on 3. It is possible, and in fact, required to have a designer which does not have a humanoid characteristic. because the humanoid character is in itself, a design. and if all designers must be humanoid, then humanoid designers must require other humanoid designer. who in turn will require other humanoid designs.

1)To everything human beings created human beings are gods even if the things cant reason ask abov their existence 2) if human beings have intelegence to create AI (Artificial Intelegent) but they do not have intelegence to determine its end then it means in first place they do not have inteligence.

UyiIredia:


There are few variations but these variations are never different from the type we see among species.

This sentence already defeats its purpose. Why would the variation within a specie of fossilized animals be more than what can be observed within living species, when that is the parameter that paleontologists use to divide fossils into species? So, what exactly are you looking for?

UyiIredia:

Also, and more importantly, there are many fossils that are exactly similar to their living counterparts today they have to be explained away using the clock and bull story of evolutionary stasis.

Your talking about animals like the coelacanth
, right? You neglected to mention though, that research has shown that the present coelacanth is able to live in a number of diverse environments. Therefore it is safe to say that evolution did not leave these animals behind and that the resemblance is only superficial.

UyiIredia:

Lastly, if the theory were true we should see many living transitional species for a process that has been going on for billions of years. Not that you point to a viable species and call it transitional but a species with clear transitional features in place.

Another false statement. Allow me to introduce you to the archaeopteryx, perdepes, the list goes on and on.
For further reference, you can check out lungfish. These are all species with clear transitional characteristics.

Teempakguy:

1. The universe is of complex design.
2. All design must have designers.

Let change all the words 'humanoids' and replace them with god and see what you wrote means

3. All designers must have god characteristics.

Atheists disagree with theists on 3. It is possible, and in fact, required to have a designer which does not have a god characteristic. because the god character is in itself, a design. and if all designers must be god, then god designers must require other god designer. 1) I understood your point to mean that atheists believe God, but not personal GOD, 2) You belief in God but you dont want HIM to be called GOD Maybe because isnt visible (pantheism) 3) it means that since you dont believe in humanoid God you believ air, fire, water...are inteligent because they possess invisible GOD as you claim.

Speechless3:
My good friend HardMirror wont grace my thread again

I've lost onetrack, CoolUsername and frank317 all within 20hours

Look what being logical has cost me

I just saw one Mzjanet trolling somewhere. Has she seen this thread too?

THELMA
...... It's CHRIS Riverstone, whatApp me please
need to tell you something. 07069498246 very important

SHALOM!

That is not how Atheists think.

I am a Pentecostal Christian, but I so not believe that Atheists think in such a way, and it is dishonest to say that they do.

CARS ARE CREATED IN FACTORIES.

Atheists have seen Car Factories, and know that they exist

Therefore, no Atheist would challenge the existence of GENERAL MOTORS.

If the design were unfamiliar, they should deduce that another company exists that they do not know about.

ATHEISTS HAVE NEVER SEEN LIVING THINGS CREATED- but they have THEORIES as to how this COULD have come about WITHOUT GOD.

On this basis, the Educated Atheist disbelieves in God's Existence.