|
|
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 644
Elite Member
|
If you mean life then you should be able to show evidence of the designer or lack thereof, otherwise life is not part of your experiment. The hypothesis states that no regulated moving part can occur without a designer. You can't determine if life had a designer so you can't use life as evidence in support or refutation of your hypothesis. hmmm... we can not determine life did not have a designer so maybe we better forget about asking the question altogether. Scientists don't. Surprisingly when they come up with results that don't address the question that they didn't ask, people like you get upset that they don't mention the designer that they weren't looking for. Go figure. How would you try to do that? I know! We would not consider rabbits to be particularly intelligent, would we? Now, when 2 rabbits mate, the result is typically between 5 and 9 small objects with regulated moving parts. Voila! I have provided evidence that falsifies your hypothesis. whew! That took some work! Thanks for letting us know the level of your own intelligence. Undoubtedly it is difficult to presume a thing is able to understand more than it is. Then you are saying that ma and pa bunny designed their offspring? Although you seem to have moved beyond the context of 'regulated' without realizng it, I will refrain from too much ado about it since your fingers most surely are on the keyboard as well. Hopefully, unless you use this as an occasion for multitasking but all of that aside... it's not within the realm of anyone's control except yourself wherewith I suppose we could also make an excuse for lack of control. If this has something to do with my example, I can't see it. Sorry.
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
|
|
