Evolution isn't that hard to grasp once you bother to look at the research. I posed a long post on the vlog a while back.
madthumbs wrote:
"Who made the designer" - well who made matter?
The whole problem with your question is the who portion. Why does there have to be a who? Dawkins pokes fun of the question because the burden of proof is on those that believe in a designer.
madthumbs wrote:
He seems like controlled opposition to me.
Based on what evidence?
Tue Feb 24, 2009 2:28 pm
madthumbs
Joined: 22 Feb 2006 Posts: 8221 Location: Fingerlakes - NY usa
Quote:
Evolution isn't that hard to grasp once you bother to look at the research. I posed a long post on the vlog a while back.
If it's the one I'm thinking of, it didn't make any points and I wondered why you posted it there.
Quote:
The whole problem with your question is the who portion.
I'm not the one that initialized the "who" question.
I'm not the one that initialized the "who" question.
Quote:
"Who made the designer" - well who made matter? Rolling Eyes
Seems like theists are the one's with a designer argument.
Quote:
He seems like controlled opposition to me.
For something like this to even begin to seem credible, you would have to point out the controller.
Quote:
His lack of evidence.
You missed the whole point. You can't form or defend a scientific theory without evidence. It becomes bunk if you can provide your own evidence nullifying the theory.
