XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 10:35:21 -0600, Free Lunch  wrote:   
      
   >On Thu, 01 Jan 2015 23:15:38 -0500, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 10:23:45 -0600, Free Lunch  wrote:   
   >>.   
   >>>On Mon, 29 Dec 2014 07:44:26 -0500, mur.@.not. wrote:   
   >>>   
   >...   
   >>>>    No. If there is a designer then it's pretty obvious that he made use   
   of the   
   >>>>evolutionary method of developing life on this planet, even though we   
   can't jump   
   >>>>in the "lab" with him and see exactly how he went about making it take   
   place.   
   >>>>That's one of the basic starting lines atheists are unable to get as "far"   
   as.   
   >>>>Can you?   
   >>>   
   >>>Show us your evidence that a designer did something. As far as I can   
   >>>tell, your argument is that science is right, but that you want to add a   
   >>>designer that you have absolutely no evidence for, a designer that is   
   >>>indistinguishable from nothing   
   >>   
   >>    Yet WE have no reason to believe the proof you demand should be   
   available to   
   >>humans, much less do any of us have any idea what you're imaginig it should   
   be,   
   >>or where it should be, or why it should be available to us, or when it should   
   >>have been or should be made available. Your supposed criticism means NOTHING,   
   >>and you can't even pretend it does mean anything as you consistently prove   
   every   
   >>time you're challenged on it.   
   >   
   >I never demand proof. I ask for evidence.   
      
       YOU ARE evidence.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)