Bad argument

by goddidit 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Ding

  Actually, I don't think your argument proves what you want to prove.

  I don't know of any theist who would say that God COULD not have created a system in which species become more and more complex. That's THEISTIC evolution, in which God designed and guides the process.

  The irreducible complexity argument of Behe is used to challenge ATHEISTIC (Darwinian) evolution, which requires a mechanism involving UNDESIGNED, UNGUIDED, changes over time. Irreducible complexity argues that these gradual and random processes are insufficient to account for the complexity of living systems.
• 

  Ding

  Jwfacts said:

  A baby is one of the strongest arguments for evolution IMO. It shows that a code can evolve life.

  What do you mean by "evolve life"?

  Creationists do not dispute that DNA codes are involved in reproduction or that they produce variations within limits, so the development of babies does nothing to refute creationism.

  But Darwinian evolution requires far more -- that the codes themselves originated randomly from non-life and have themselves evolved through gradual random changes to produce entirely different kinds of life forms and that, in fact, that is what accounts for all life that exists.
• 

  jgnat

  If the goal is waking up the Witness, I'd ask a well-crafted open ended question. Let them chew on it. You can use reason to wake up a Witness, as long as it is their reasoning, not yours.

  Evolution might not be my first choice.

  What got me thinking past the glib biblical accounts is the sheer age of the universe. If light is a constant, and we know that some stars that we see are millions of light-years away, mustn't our earth be at least that old?

  The exotic creatures in Australia is another one. Why only there, if they had dispersed from the Ark?
• 

  Yan Bibiyan

  Plus, God doesn't seem that interested in trying to convert someone who had already made up their mind not to believe in God. In fact, he goes out of his way to make it even easier to believe there is no god!

  Making up one's mind to not believe in god, dear Lars, is not a spur of the moment decision - like brown mustard or dijon mustard...

  Very high percentage of atheists who were religious at some point had become atheists precisely because god did not bother to offer the tiniest shred of evidence in answer to their incessant prayers for clarity...
• 

  goddidit

  A few of you seem to have misunderstood my post. I'm not saying that this proves evolution or disproves god.

  I'm just saying that " Using complexity to argue against evolution is a bad argument".

  steve2: Interesting points. Thanks. Could you recommend any particular book or websites?

  jgnat: I think you're referring to the Australian Marsupials. A very good case for evolution and against Noah's ark. The age and size of the universe isn't a problem for the JW story (after they embellish the bible a bit). Do you have any other suggestions?
• 

  villagegirl

  You do realize that a lot of really advanced Phd's in

  Physics and Biology and other sciences with way more

  knowledge on the subject than you or I, still

  believe in God and evolution at the same time.

  One does not cancel out the other.

  This insistence on explaining everything in simplistic terms

  and step by step explanations is so - "Watchtower".
• 

  goddidit

  villagegirl I will assume you're responding to me.

  What is a 'really advanced' PHD. Is it better than a standard one?

  Where did I claim that god and evolution are mutually exclusive? In fact, that is what I'm arguing against.

  To which 'simplistic terms' are you referring?