A)We see extreme complexity, and we know it could not happen randomly. Randomness does not create information.
B)There had to be an inteligent creator.
C)If there was an inteligent creator, then he must have known what he was doing (and would have enough inteligence to think of making improvements if they would make things better; what He didn't do, there was obviously a reason)
D)Since we don't even know the complete depth of all that is, we should be carefull until we fully understand every aspect of what we are doing.
Let's assume B (I'll return to that). C doesn't follow. Why would a creator, no matter how intelligent, necessarily create things perfectly? Here:
A) Humans are intelligent.
B) Humans create things.
C) Some things humans create don't function correctly.
D) Therefore, an intelligent creator does not necessarily create perfect products.
But returning to A: I agree with you completely, but not in the way you think. Yes, life is complex. Yes, no way it got there randomly. Nope, randomness will create information only with the most vanishing of odds. But that doesn't mean there was a creator. The process of evolution by natural selection is
not random, and by the way you've worded your points it's obvious you don't understand that.
Yes, the first step is random. Mutation is random. But evolution is more than just mutation: it's the
natural selection bit that is important. Mutations are inevitably going to be either harmful, beneficial, or entirely neutral; ignoring the last option, which of the first two do you think will be passed on by the animal? The mutation that allows it to escape predators and other dangers, or the one that kills it early in life? The process is the
exact opposite of random.
So, you see, your B point is rather flawed. The complexity of life is easily explainable without god, and, by Occam's Razor, that makes his existence entirely superfluous.
Ever think life is messed up because we made it that way?
I mean life as in "living things". Life fails to work all the time. There are plenty of flaws. Look at any of a number of disorders, genetic diseases, and so on: look at, for example, diabetes I, or more precisely, its treatment. Until the synthesis of insulin became available, cattle insulin was used instead; however, because it is very slightly different from human insulin, some people who took it for diabetes suffered ill effects because their body's immune system attacked the foreign protein. See? Life fucking up! And then we bright humans came along and solved the problem by synthesising the proper protein. And that example is merely the first to jump to mind: I can name plenty more, if you like.
As much as I hate arguing with an Admin...
Argue all you like. I am not magically omniscient just because I happen to be an admin on a small forum no one in the grand scheme of things really cares about.
Just don't be ignorant and don't ignore my points, okay? Nothing is more frustrating in a debate.
