o2<<OUG,I realise that the Bible is hard to defend>>im not defending the bible...those who wrote it..i take as having recorded things..according as they saw them to be...they set out to record...not lie...

at least presume they had higher intent...had they not we would never have evolved..[spiritually]writinhg comes via the priesthood/math science it all has its roots in religion

<<I thought you were above name calling>>..sticks and stones...names can never hurt anyone...i can try to be nice..[read swedenberg]..i have freewill to chose not to be...but mainly i chose to TRY TO BE...only god is perfect/love/grace/mercy...i wont pretend to be anywhere near perfect

<<Didn't you just "Bear False Witness"...EXODUS20:16...by calling people Sodomites especially when you brought up the story of Lot?>>..as previously stated in other posts...the 'god' of these realms is not my god...jesus was offered these realms and refused it...the lord of the bible is the lord of these realms..read comments on the job topic

<<you totally believe things that are obviously fiction>>..its you that take delusions /fictions..as true..if not..PRESENT YOUR PROOF....of evolution...where you think i err correct or rebut me

<<what does it tell you about your beliefs or the intestinal fortitude of the other Christians here?>>..they accept their faith in evolution..[just like their pope]..because they..like you lot dont know how to reads and test their root/science...but..they make no claim of science..[only blind faith like you]

>>By getting angry with reasonable questions...aren't you letting down your GOD?>>..what we do matters little to god...are you concerned about the micro beast..living in your eyelash?...

we are spirits having an incarnate life experience...live with it..if your faith is in science..present the science

I think that all the huge design flaws in the human physiology, social and mental structures would indicate that if there was a designer, he was extremely sloppy, and intelligent would have been a stretch.

Builing man in his image would be compounding the error.

Perhaps the One Underdog could shed some light on this abuse of reason.

minester of shadows quote<<huge design flaws..in/human physiology>>>sad..one so wise as you..miss the builtin failsafes we have..in our physio-logical selves,

we..daily murder our brains/livers with booze/etc..yet the body keeps these organs..[in the main]..functioning till they have rotted completly away...unlike the perfectly designed...lol..moter-car..that dies..if you simply insert.../the wrong fuel..into it...lol[or fail's to go..to a service]

your missing/how perfect the body is for its function...to house the spirit of life..to allow the body to form its soul..[then the soul body lives on ..ousing its life spirit]...for eternity...

its self repairing..[the best science can do..is fix a bone in place..while the bone heals itself...surgens would be useless/..simply using their surgery..if the body didnt heal itself

we can expoliate..yet further..in the future..[when we extract stem-cells from our fat-cells..to inject them into our broken spines or destroyed organs...to help the body assist its own healing...they are allready making dogs walk..with their own stem cells harvested from their own fat...its not a science..lol..invention...science and medicine..is only finding..what the physiology allways had

<<social>>>..is at the control of men..[thus freewill will see excess]..but gods perfection is revealed even here...see god could have created mindless-automotons...but instead..chose us each to have freewill...its time you realised..how clever that turns out to be..i know it mightent seem it yet...but soon..we will all be appriciated as together..revealing the fullness and goodness..of our creators hand...that we did to the least..we did to god

<<and mental structures..if there was a designer,he was extremely sloppy,>>...yet..even the most ignorant..yet can have a decent reality

<<intelligent would have been a stretch>>>..ok no sweat create but one like it[..or better yet do it better...your kids no doudt are perfect right?...an arm chair critic..will allways critisize while even the worst footballer..is yet on the field making the effort.

<<Builing man in his image..would be compounding the error>>..i presume[mr perfect]..you mean building....it seems better/gods error...than your..best efforts..my bro...would?...or did?

<<abuse of reason>>...opinions are like..iffs and butts..[we all got at least one]..feel free to reveal your reasoning....be more precice on what..god did wrong...

anyhow..as usual..no science thought..or facts to re-butt here

"I think that all the huge design flaws in the human physiology, social and mental structures would indicate that if there was a designer, he was extremely sloppy, and intelligent would have been a stretch." - Shadow Minister

Good point. The Scientific American once put out a special publication on flaws in the design of humans and made suggestions as to how to improve things. If memory serves SA were able to design a superior back to ours'.

OUG,

The Intelligent Design issues I raised?

By whose design do cells become malignant?

Congratulations OUG!

This thread is now a week old. In multiple posts you have managed to refrain from mentioning Israel. That's progress!

Unfortunately you appear to have missed the point of my original post.

The possible existence of an intelligent designer does NOT imply the truth of the bible, the koran, or any other holy book.

I do not know whether there exists an intelligent designer. I do know that an itinerant first century Jewish preacher was NOT God incarnate who rose from the dead. I also know that a seventh century Arabian warlord NEVER received any communication from the intelligent designer assuming one exists.

OLIVER, SHADOW MINISTER, OPINIONATED2, et al

I am afraid that you too have also all missed my point.

We do not need to evoke the existence of an intelligent designer in order to explain the evolution of complex life forms. Darwinian evolution through natural selection is all the explanation we need.

The question is, how do we explain what the physicist Paul Davies and other call the Goldilocks enigma? How is it that the laws of physics and the constants of nature are fine tuned so as to allow for the emergence and evolution of chemically based life forms?

If you want just one example of how unlikely this all appears I urge you to study the following link. It explains the bizarre coincidence that enables stars to synthesise carbon.

http://www.np.ph.bham.ac.uk/research/anthropic.htm

Note, this is just ONE of DOZENS of known "cosmic coincidences" that had to work out just right for any sort of chemically based life forms to be able to appear and evolve.

There are speculations aplenty about how we come to inhabit a Goldilocks universe. But at the moment we have no scientifically testable theories.

For a wikipedia discussion see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

The problem with evolution is that our animal origins tend to get in the way.Consequentially we tend to make some bad/biased underpinning assumptions to our reasoning.

the first is that there must be *a reason* for life. Why? on what logical non anthropomorphic justification is there.....none,zilch, Nada boopkiss.

Consider I *need* for to be as besotted with me as I with her. Its all I can think about, we're both intelligent and therefore suited it makes logical sense that we should be together(in my mind but would an unbiased alien agree?) I doubt it...it's NOT an irreducible universal truth.

Others assume that we are the highest life form and our culture/nation etc. are their respective paragons virtually superior to all others. Again why?

That is not what Evolution says. Like proverbial justice the direction of evolution is blind its only criteria is to survive and hence the most adaptable does so in the longer run. Not survival of the fittest or strongest. Let's get real a Trex is both fitter and stronger than any man yet they went extinct.

There is an argument for 'punctuated equilibrium' i.e. change by paradigms not gradual steps.

All this need to understand our environment/struggle for survival and supremacy etc can be rationally explained as manifestations of animal instincts.
One can surmise that we haven't yet (or ever) out grown our needs for animal instincts.

Humans are categorised as being linked genetically with primates but no where does evolution say we evolved from the same "we had a common ancestor"(Full stop).

Just because some animals roll in poo and act on chemical pheromones is NO justification/explanation for us to behave like our genetic predecessors.

Just because one is secular that DOESN'T mean that individual is any lessor a human.

In short the most likely universal truth is 'Life is its own reason' and therefore the only logical morals are those that are Humanistic.
If there is an Intelligent designer by life's ad hoc nature he must be a real 'bush' carpenter!

Oliver,
Have you got a title or date etc for the American S edition?