This is why I don't like debating religion

[timmah]

dsgrue3 said:

timmah said:

dsgrue3 said:
I think the answer to that question is obvious. A better question is where does the evidence lead us? Does the evidence or lack thereof point toward a supernatural being, or no? I think the answer to that question is obvious as well, but perhaps that's just me.

To somebody who believes in God, the immense complexity of the natural world, the amazing interconnected systems that allow all levels of life to function, the interdependence of plant and animal life, the necessity for such precision in the distance of the earth from the sun, exact composition of the atmosphere, necessity of magnetic poles to repel deadly cosmic radiation, and the countless other exact specifications necessary for life that exist on earth add up to an unsurmountable pile of evidence for intelligent design. You see it otherwise. I can see one of those things as being mathematically possible via some equation, but when you add all of them up, there is no way in my view that the entirity of the systems on this life sustaining planet could possibly happen by random chance. This is why it really depends on what evidence you look at it, and how you interpret that evidence.

I agree it's all very spectacularly unlikely, which is why we haven't discovered life elsewhere. I think if you seek to find something, you will find it. 

We have described the process by which we formed, non-organic matter + energy lead to an organic molecule then countless generations of evolution occurred eventually leading to us as humans.

I can't see how you support Intelligent Design when 99% of species that have existed are extinct. What a gigantic waste. The vastness of the Universe again points to a complete waste and it's increasing in waste each second by more than the speed of light. 

You see life as the reason for the conditions, but it is the conditions that are the reason for life. 

 

My point is that we have never observed non-organic matter + energy leading to life, so this is just theoretical postulation. The only life we've ever observed came from other previously existing life. Life coming from non-organic matter goes against everything that has been observed to date.

On the universe being a waste, I strongly disagree (and bear with me for the sake of argument). If God is beyond the scope of the universe and created the universe for his and our enjoyment, it is not a waste, just as art is not a waste even though it arguably has no tangible purpose. The fact that 99% of life that has existed is now extinct is not a waste either, because many of those have led to what exists today (like I said before, I think some level of evolution within general species is designed into the system to make it resilient).

You could also use that logic to say humanity is a waste, since so most humans have died over the course of history and no longer exist. If the soul is eternal, this argument will also not hold water.