You may not be a creationist, but you apparently "are" Teleologist. LOL. You should be more careful while switching aliases between responses. Anyway, as you and Teleologist are apparently one in the same, I'm no longer interested in discussing this issue with either of you.
I don't switch aliases, yet another unfounded accusation from you... That's what folks do when they are losing argument, they make unfounded ad hominem accusations...
I don't switch aliases, yet another unfounded accusation from you... That's what folks do when they are losing arguments, they make unfounded ad hominem accusations... Then you are observed, in a display of finality, walking out of the room in a huff, so darn ladylike... LOL!
Actually my knowlege and experience with forum posts explains the origin of your posts quite handily. It was written by a human, who is a member of a species that evolved from a single-celled common ancestor that arose through abiogenesis. My argument does not suffer the infinte regress problem, at all. At this point, I have answered all your contentions. You simply refuse to acknowledge that. Its really hard to win arguments when your opponents are allowed to appeal to completely faulty logic.
your 'opponents' will not see things that way... faith is sthg that gives them 'courage' in the face of uncertainty mostly, gives them 'answers', albeit simplistic ones... its not sthg they are willing to question / probe too much, nor to allow to be questioned / probed too much... if u get too close to s.o.'s particular 'anchors', then all you get is a fear-driven response, rationality not a priority at all here, cause the subject's topmost priority is to protect the anchors... thankfully not 2 theists seem to have the exact same set of anchors... now to be fair, faith is not solely a religious-based phenomenon...not that you were saying that at all.... just to appease the resident shamans...
Is there some law about not responding to your posts? Too funny... Try PM's if you want private conversations...
Miller addresses that very topic about 50 minutes into his lecture and it lasted for about 10 minutes. You can fast-forward to that point if you really give a shit. If you are too lazy to listen to it, then I am certainly not stupid enough to type it out for you.
You argument does suffer from the following opinion thrown out like it was some fact of existence... "It was written by a human, who is a member of a species that evolved from a single-celled common ancestor that arose through abiogenesis."