The answer is still the same as it was the last 10 times you asked this same question in this thread. You are the one claiming that life is designed. So far the only proof you have provided is "Can you prove it wasn't designed'? The only shocking thing is that a grown man would believe that this sophistry would ever fly. ID is Christian Creation theory rebranded for the 21st century. It is a faith-based belief system. There never was and never will be proof for it. Ours is a secular society in its public face. The ID/Creationists have as their stated goal the remaking of society in 'a manner more consistent with theistic ideals'. This is not wanted by the majority of citizens. The ID'ers in this thread have provided only assertion in response to calls for proof of their theory. They have also, in a bizarre twist, attacked the scientific method, the very method which they claim supports their theory. This reveals some confusion on their part. As revealed by Zeleologist's last 10 posts, they have nothing left in the tank, except repeatedly asking the same questions over and over again. Zeleologist has asked the question above at least 25 times in this thread and has received the same answers from Christians and non-Christians alike. It is only vanity and intellectual arrogance that forces him to continue posting, after his arguments have been shot to hell.
Oh my God... could it be that you misunderstood this post so completely? Actually, I don't believe it. I think you are just baiting me at this point. In fact... what the hell am I talking about, Z? Baiting is all you ever do on this site!!!
TraderNik wrote: Why do you continue to misrepresent what I've said? Where did I ever say I could prove life was designed?
The proof of non-teleologic origin is that this theory is simpler than the teleologic theory. Proposing the existence of a designer, requires that an organized intelligence with infinite power has always existed, while proposing no designer merely requires that organization can occur by chance. There is no proof of any sort that a designer has always existed, however there is abundent proof that randomness can self organize. http://mgl.scripps.edu/projects/tan.../TangibleModels/self-assembling-virus-web.mov If even one proof of the latter exists, it is infinitely greater in amount than the amount of proof existing for the former.
No one is misrepresenting you. Nik was pointing out that you claimed life was designed without providing any proof. And yet you were asking for proof that life was not designed, and insisting that otherwise one should believe in design without a proof. You're the one misrepresenting others.
James Bond wrote: More misrepresentation. I've never claimed life was designed, so I'm under no obligation to offer proof that life was designed. And I've never insisted that anyone should believe in design. It's the ID critics that insist life is undesigned and that every reasonable person should agree with them. Therefore they are obligated to offer evidence that supports their view. It is my contention that both sides in this debate are merely airing their suspicions. I happen to think my teleological suspicions are as empirically based as the non-teleological suspicions of the ID critics. All investigations begin with suspicions. There is no reason why a teleological approach can't run an investigation based on observations, logic, and testing. It is merely an alternative view. It is capable of exploring and interpreting scientific data (thus it can use science) and it can also generate subsidiary hypotheses and predictions (thus it can guide science)."
LOL. He's just jerking you off, buddy. He couldn't care less about ID, creationism or anything else. He just wants to keep you fighting with him, because that's how he maintains his superiority over others. Happy Holidays.
Scientists first visiting Mars discover several pyramids similar to those found in Egypt. Proving that a non-teleological process was behind their origin is simpler than the proposing they were designed. Proposing a teleological process requires explaining the origin of the pyramid builders. This in turn requires that an organized intelligence with infinite power has always existed, while proposing no designer merely requires that organization can occur by chance. There is no proof of any sort that a designer has always existed, however there is abundent proof that randomness can self organize. Therefore, the scientists propose that the pyramids on Mars were the result of non-intelligent processes.