Apr 30, 2012 -- 11:11AM, Ken wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:56AM, ni-cherise wrote:

Your not answering my questions. How is it known that 99.9% of life would not have went extinct if some sort of design happened? How is it known that we would not go extinct one day if some sort of design happened?

Durability is a criterion of good design.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:56AM, ni-cherise wrote:

LMAO,.....So, man knows that the universe should have the durability to exist forever? Man didn't know that they would one day exist, but man knows what the criterion of good design of the universe would be. If the universe should exist forever, and 99.9% of life should have been durable enough to still exist, where is the evidence that supports that belief? How is it known that life should have been meant to exist forever? It makes no sense to make rules on how the universe should exist when it's existence is out of our control.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:18PM, Ken wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 11:18AM, ni-cherise wrote:

If "mistakes" in the make up of the universe proves non-intelligent design, I want to know how that is known. What actual evidence supports that belief?

Intelligent design would be good design. There are definite criteria for good design. The universe does not conform to those criteria; therefore, it is not a product of intelligent design.

Okay,...your making rules for how the universe should operate. Tell me how it's known that the universe should be durable to stand forever? Tell me how it's known that 99.9% of life should have been durable enough to still exist? What actual evidence proves that belief, because that's all it really is?

If life doesn't prove design, extinct life can't prove non-design. LOL,...there is no case for non-intelligent design, it just the opposite belief to intelligent design.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:31PM, Ken wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:26PM, ni-cherise wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:18PM, Ken wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 11:18AM, ni-cherise wrote:

If "mistakes" in the make up of the universe proves non-intelligent design, I want to know how that is known. What actual evidence supports that belief?

Intelligent design would be good design. There are definite criteria for good design. The universe does not conform to those criteria; therefore, it is not a product of intelligent design.

Okay,...your making rules for how the universe should operate.

Not at all. I'm merely telling you how it would operate if it were intelligently designed. It does not operate that way; therefore, it is not intelligently designed. 

The universe operates well enough for us to be here, if just for the moment. Now where is the evidence that proves life should be durable enough to exist forever? Like I said,..if LIFE doesn't proves design,..EXTINCT LIFE can't prove non-intelligent design, it's all just belief.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:37PM, ni-cherise wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 12:31PM, Ken wrote:

Not at all. I'm merely telling you how it would operate if it were intelligently designed. It does not operate that way; therefore, it is not intelligently designed.

The universe operates well enough for us to be here, if just for the moment. Now where is the evidence that proves life should be durable enough to exist forever?

As I said, durability is a criterion of good design.

The Beautiful design of a rose doesn't prove design,..right?.... right? So the awful design of a dead rose can't prove non-design, right?,... right? RIGHT!!!!  I've seen atheist tell believers of creation,...a bed of flowers don't prove creation, ..well if that's really the case, a bed of dead flowers can't prove non-design.