Questions for the Atheists

[yanong_banikanhon]

---

Igo man lang kong nagsulti sa tinuod, bay. Kanang imong gihatag nga link sa imong previous post dili na maoy tubag anang akong pangutana sa taas. Mao na ang imong tubag adtong question nako bahin sa abiogenesis. Mao na nga naka-ingon ko nga naghilom2x na ka human ka mopasupot anang imong statement nga If you do arrive at a supreme deity conclusion while using logic, then your logic is flawed.

Kindly answer my question:

Asa man ang logical proof aning imong statement nga: If you do arrive at a supreme deity conclusion while using logic, then your logic is flawed. ?

[yanong_banikanhon]

Kay lagi ang atong topic questions man para sa mga atheist, nia pay laing pangutana (daghan na'g backlogs ang mga atheists kay ubay2x na pud sa mga questions ang wala gyud nila mahatagi'g tarong nga tubag...hehehe.):

Matud ninyo, the transformation of a very simple, single-cell life-form to a multi-cellular organism takes million of years.
But all of us know that it only takes nine SHORT months for a living single diploid cell called zygote (the fertilized egg cell) to transform into probably THE most complex multi-cellular organism called human fetus.

Unsaon man ninyo pag-harmonize kanang two conflicting statements sa taas?

Kana ra bang kadugayon (TIME), mao ra ba na ang inyong kasagarang excuse kun pangitaan mo'g proof sa abiogenesis or evolution. Ayaw ko'g tubaga nga sometimes it could take million years, sometimes only nine months, ha. Kay mahimong kataw-anan ang science ana.

[treize]

These people are banking on the argument for "Irreducible Complexity" to push forward their belief or agenda in Intelligent Design..

The argument is central or the core of Intelligent Design, and is rejected by the scientific community, which overwhelmingly regards intelligent design as pseudoscience. One science writer called it a "full-blown intellectual surrender strategy."The gist of the whole argument goes like this:

Systems are irreducibly complex if removing any one part destroys the system's function. Irreducible complexity in organisms indicates they were designed.

Irreducible complexity is claimed to indicate (but does not) that certain systems could not have evolved gradually. However, jumping from there to the conclusion that those systems were designed is an argument from incredulity. There is NOTHING about irreducibly complex systems that is positive evidence for design.
Argument from Incredulity is like this:

It is inconceivable that (fill in the blank) could have originated naturally. Therefore, it must have been created.

This argument, also known as the argument from ignorance or "god of the gaps," is implicit in a very many different creationist arguments. In particular, it is behind all arguments against abiogenesis and any and all claims of intelligent design.

The argument from incredulity creates a 'god of the gaps'. Gods were responsible for lightning until we determined natural causes for lightning, for infectious diseases until we found bacteria and viruses, for mental illness until we found biochemical causes for them. God is confined only to those parts of the universe we do not know about, and that keeps shrinking everyday..

Plagiarism.. tsk! tsk! tsk!...

[treize]

Your DNA is not 100% identical to your parents... but information can be obtained from your DNA that allows people to determine if you are their Child or not.

In the same way, Human DNA is not 100% identical to Apes but information on DNA shows that Man and Ape are closely related.

Notice that in all your replies, You have said that my model or explanation is incorrect BUT You have not presented or mentioned an alternate model which you believe is more accurate.

Why don't you present your explanation then we'll argue based on the merits of both on which is most likely to be the correct one.

Suheto na ta og DNA ani ron.. bilib gyud ko ninyo.. bisag-asa suheto..

ngano diay nang DNA nga ni follow mana siya og certain formation... mura bag sa computer program nga binary code? Basin makatubag ka ani kay ang mga scientist nahibong man sad gud..

Naa pay lain, nganong ang universe ni follow man og laws unya constant pa gyud nga accident ra man unta ang nahibo? Na amaze man gani si Einstein ani.. maglisod sad siya og tuo nga accident ra ang tanan...

[nowpress*]

kuyawa noh? ang nonbeliever pa ron ang moprovide ug ebidensya. brad, whatever proof you have about the existence of god, dili convinced ang atheist about it. ana ra kasimple. karon nga dili mi motuo, nganong kami pa man ang moprovide ug proof?

btw, you believe in ID? following such logic, an intelligent designer also needs another designer... and the chain of designer-designs-the-designer never stops. dugay ra na girefute ang ID.

kong kabalo ka bai onsay required for a statement to be true then you will comply to give us proof. ang problema ninyo is wa mo kasabot sige mo og ramblings pero wa moy ika soporta sa inyong position, di na sakto. sama gud ani mo ingon ka nako nga naay iring sa imong kuarto nya akong sopakon og mo ingon ko nga way iring sa imong kuarto, karon onsaon man nako pag support sa akong statement nga way iring sa imong kuarto? by evidence and proof. mao nay sakto onta ninyong buhaton. we say there is God you say...WALA, then support it with evidence, dili kay poro lang mo yawyaw. nya nganong maglisod man mo og hatag sa evidence, wa gyud sigoroy evidence sa.

pasensya na bai ,wa ra ba mi nag apas sa standard sa Atheism, kon di ang Logic og Laws sa investigation among gisunod, so bahalag di mo motoo we could care less kay di man kamo among standard.

well that's because wa ka kasabot. mo ingon gani ta og design pasabot created, now by definition God is the uncaused cause, uncreated creator. kong maghisgut ta og bachelor ang mosolod sa atong huna huna is DILI MINYO, therefore it's wrong to ask kong kinsay asawa sa bachelor. Now by definition God is the uncaused cause so its wrong to ask kong kinsay ga create niya.

infinite regression is impossible.

[nowpress*]

You need to read a few stephen hawking books para makasabot ka how things evolved from the big bang.

I suggest the ff: books to start...

- Brief History of Time
- The Grand Design

please take time to read then let's talk after...

di ra si Hawkings ang source bai kong gosto ka magtoon sa BB theory. mao ng honong na aning tactic nga go read this and that para kasabot ka about this and that, karaan na kaayo na nga depensa.

ikaw kong kasabot ka ni Hawkings hala ipakita diri kong onsay imong nasabtan, tanawon nato kong kasabot ba ka sa libro ni hawkings.

[kajrot1]

^
^
^
follow up question sa imong g quote na c Vipvip
what's the difference between the GRAND DESIGN AND an INTELLIGENT DESIGN??

[rodsky]

Igo man lang kong nagsulti sa tinuod, bay. Kanang imong gihatag nga link sa imong previous post dili na maoy tubag anang akong pangutana sa taas. Mao na ang imong tubag adtong question nako bahin sa abiogenesis.

Exactly! Yet you still express this statement AFTER I've already given you sufficient answers to your questions:

Pataka la'g himo og mga assumptions unya kun pangitaag proof, hilom pa sa tungang-gabii.Tsk.tsk.tsk.

Diri man akong reklamo sa imo--prior to this post, naa ba ko'y gisulti nga PATAKA? So why did my previous post warrant a "pataka" comment from you. Tarong ko nga tawo the last time I checked--dili ko pataka.

-RODION

[kajrot1]

Kay lagi ang atong topic questions man para sa mga atheist, nia pay laing pangutana (daghan na'g backlogs ang mga atheists kay ubay2x na pud sa mga questions ang wala gyud nila mahatagi'g tarong nga tubag...hehehe.):

Matud ninyo, the transformation of a very simple, single-cell life-form to a multi-cellular organism takes million of years.
But all of us know that it only takes nine SHORT months for a living single diploid cell called zygote (the fertilized egg cell) to transform into probably THE most complex multi-cellular organism called human fetus.

Unsaon man ninyo pag-harmonize kanang two conflicting statements sa taas?

Kana ra bang kadugayon (TIME), mao ra ba na ang inyong kasagarang excuse kun pangitaan mo'g proof sa abiogenesis or evolution. Ayaw ko'g tubaga nga sometimes it could take million years, sometimes only nine months, ha. Kay mahimong kataw-anan ang science ana.

acutally they say not millions but billions of years daw for a certain organism to evolve.

ako lng ni e QUOTE og balik kay nindot ni imo pangutana kay matabunan nya ni sa limot

[nowpress*]

acutally they say not millions but billions of years daw for a certain organism to evolve.

ako lng ni e QUOTE og balik kay nindot ni imo pangutana kay matabunan nya ni sa limot

mao lagi na, haha. sila sigeg sulti nga naay evidence kono lagi nya kong hisgutan na ang evidence molihay kay hadlok ma refute. tan-awa ng sample ni yanong_banikanhon. kong maghsigut ta og evidence nya atong e scrutinize makita jud ang tinood og mao ng gilikayan ani nila, hadlok sila ma refute ilang evidence.

sa pagkatinood lang I am in doubt kong kasabot pa gyud ni sila sa ilang evolution, duda ko wa ni sila kasabot. by faith man gud pod ng ilaha.