NoName
Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013
|
| Quote (GaryGaulin @ Aug. 15 2015,19:27) | | Quote (Woodbine @ Aug. 15 2015,17:54) | As we approach 500 pages I can only think that blowing air through a dead animal might have been a better use of your time, Gary.
We'll always need bagpipers. |
It sure is true that the "bad design" arguments quickly become a pointless waste of time. I do need to get back to more productive things. |
You continue to be unable to distinguish between "no evidence of design" arguments and "bad design" arguments.
What a pity that that makes every single one of your anti- 'bad design' arguments silly and irrelevant right out of the gate.
NOBODY here is arguing 'bad design' -- we're arguing "show us a reason to believe this was designed".
You are no more able to do that than to provide positive evidence for your absurdist "theory".
No more able to do that than to defend the ridiculous conclusion required by your "theory" -- that generation of a theory, creation of a melody or chord progression, recognition of a previously heard melody when transposed into a new key, played on a different instrument, and at a different tempo, among many other acts of intelligence, do not count as 'intelligent' because they do not inherently require "something to control".
|
