please give substantial, POSITIVE evidence that a creator/intelligent designer is not needed to explain our existence.
This thread should not be used for bashing religion/bible etc. So you should not argument like this, for example :
the bible are fairy tale stories, the earth is six tousand years old is ridiculous, god killed a lot of people etc.
What i want to see, is scientific/philosophic evidence that shows we , and our universe, can be explained without invoking a intelligent designer.
What explanations do you have on hand ?
In order to explain an observation, you can come up with as many explanations as you can think of. As experimental evidence mounts, some of these explanations will be become more feasible than others, and one can confidently accept some of the explanations as true, and confidently reject others.
It clearly makes no sense to propose an explanation of which the validity cannot be tested experimentally. Proposing God as the cause of the universe without also proposing a means of falsification, is such a case.
Perhaps you should first provide a philosophically/scientifically rigorous and falsifiable definition of your “creator/intelligent designer” so that we may know exactly what we are talking about. Thereafter, you can, in keeping with the norms of debate, pull the plug on this transparent attempt at reversal where the aim is to sneak an onus of disproof onto those who reject a positive existence claim for some ill-defined hypothetical “creator/intelligent designer.” And when you have done that, you can try to guide yourself to the realisation that if you were genuinely interested, Google and a library are excellent places at which to begin your quest.
I have defined God as creator / designer. That is enough for this topic. Why is a creator/intelligent designer not needed. What do you propose as alternative, and why ?
So if we were to dig up the fossilized remains of a modern wolf in Cambrian strata, you wouldn't be tempted to pounce at all?
please give substantial, POSITIVE evidence that a creator/intelligent designer is not needed to explain our existence.
As an interesting aside, I’m not sure that it is logically possible to provide positive evidence for a negative proposition. Can anyone think of an example? The best one can hope for is to provide positive evidence for a positive proposition that excludes the original negative proposition. In other words: Paul did not steal the cheese, because I only found Peter’s fingerprints on the fridge door.
See my signature please. You wouldn’t want to be called on being dishonest would you? To answer your question, however, the God hypothesis is superfluous as an explanation and simply ends up shifting the goal posts.
Please lets keep on track with the topic, otherwise it will derive in the usual bible bashing.....
If you don't bring the bible in, I won't. I'd still like an answer to my question now.
It seems you complicate things. Our universe exists. We exist. That demands a explanation. If you exclude a creator/designer as the best explanation, you need to come up with different/better explanation. Go ahead…
fine. the God hypotheses is in your opinion superfluous. To come to that conclusion, you need to provide a explanation where a creator in the formula is not needed. Do you have one ?
Please lets keep on track with the topic, otherwise it will derive in the usual bible bashing.....
If you don't bring the bible in, I won't. I'd still like an answer to my question now.
[/quote]
I have not received any of yours yet, either.
Jahaziel, can you please explain why you did not need to rape a five year old kid last Saturday? Burden of proof rests with the claimant, not the denier. This is a very elementary concept in debate, failing which anybody can make any preposturous claim and then expect others to either accept it or disprove it.
Please provide [u]positive evidence [/u] that the universe did NOT need a giant, invisible salt cellar to come into existence.
See?
Mintaka
If you make the claim, you present the evidence. If you claim no creator/inteligent designer is needed to create the univere, but that it self sustains itself without a cause, please present evidence for that claim.
that is what i am asking for.
You tell us why the Flying Spaghetti Monster did NOT decide to make two moons around the earth when he (allegedly) created the universe. If you can not does that mean he exists?
Indeed. As it doesn’t explain anything and requires an explanation in and of itself. Think about this for a second.
To come to that conclusion, you need to provide a explanation where a creator in the formula is not needed. Do you have one ?
Yes. It is not needed. You have to show why it *is* needed. I am still waiting for an answer to this...
I have not received any of yours yet, either.
Yes you have. Please re-read at your leisure. And then provide your own. It is give and take after all.
The burden of proof lies with him that makes the positive claim - that is you - when you claim God. You need to substantiate that. When you assert it without evidence like you have been doing, I am allowed to reject it without evidence. (with respects to the Hitch)
i have not made any claim so far. But IF you claim no designer/creator is needed, you should be able to explain, how the universe came to be by itself.
OK, I think I get you mean. But as Mefiante stated already, unless you can define exactly what you understand by “God”, debate is futile.
If I claim that Eggs are not required as an ingredient to make a cup of coffee , I can prove the absence of eggs in a cup of coffee by noting that the coffee tests negatively for protein. But this conclusion would rely heavily on my understanding of eggs, and what they are and what they are not.
I have defined God as creator / designer. That is enough for this topic.
It is not enough for the topic. Unlike the egg, there is simply too little information about the creator’s properties. My giant invisible salt shaker could also be deemed a creator under this definition of God. And so can the Big Bang. Or gravity. Or whatever it was that set off the Big Bang.
