What? Proof of Creationism You Say?

[tkr9]

The answer would still be the same then wouldn't it. Designed for us to ride on, to form a partnership with an animal that changed our civilisational development. We'd still probably be umming over the wheel if we hadn't had horses! And they are still too damn pretty for science to claim the design award.

I'll leave the horses for now, not everyone seems to be catching on to the idea, though good to see some others appreciate it. I could try Albinoni's Adagio for strings instead...

But I made my point, there is more to life, we can feel it. Look at the world around you, feel what it has to give you. No coincidence and certainly not attributable to science. Science explains HOW but doesn't say why. It isn't there to say why, we have to work that out for ourselves. If you believe it is all the laws of physics and that it is merely chance it all worked (which is possible I don't deny it) you still then rely on a fundamental BELIEF that that is all there is to it, for which there is no evidence whatsoever, we have no evidence at all that the laws of physics is all that exists anywhere, we cannot possibly know!

I need to go to sleep, it's three in the morning. Goodbyeee.

[Chauncy]

I agree that there is more to life than data, thats why life is so precious.

As far as the horse goes. I think a horse is a horse....it just happens to be an animal man picked to implement. If the horse had quills we wouldn't have chose them. we picked it because it was in our enviroment and we implemented it because of its ideal characteristics.

Much the same way dogs were used in the arctic.

[Stellar]

Yep. I dont think they were designed for us... we just forced them to work for us.

[X~File_Agent]

Actually as a human, you can lay down on your knees and and hands, and be able to support quite a bit of weight on your back. If anything this just proves the evolutionary process from a single cell, and how all the species share some similarities. Indeed humans aren't that unique from the animal kingdom, some just choose not to see this. You say, we have to think outside the box. If anything the minority of Agnostics and Atheists are scolded for thinking outside the box. We're the "different" crowd, a lot of Chrisitans come on here, and feel they're defending against an army. But it's quite the opposite, it's amazing how many "friends" you can loose, if you decide to choose a different line of thinking. I know from experience.

First you said not to challenge you on the horse, you would defend it for a millenium. Yet you're quick, to drop the point because people don't agree with your line of thinking. Or we're just not seeing things your way. The point of an argument is to make such a strong point, that will make someone go hmmm..... But you haven't done that yet, we've showed how the Horse theory, can be scientifically explained and how once again. The saddle was made for the horse, not the horse for the saddle. You completely ignored my comment, that without the saddle, you would be in extreme pain after riding it. If this were intelligent design, there wouldn't be a need for a saddle. Everything is supposed to work naturally. Like stellar said, the horse was in our environment, and we decided to use it as a transportation method. I'm sure the first few folks who tried to use a horse, probably got killed or the horse kicked them in the head. But once we got the horse used to us, we were able to tame it, and use it for our own purposes.

[aquatus1]

Aw, c'mon X-File. I think it has less to do with the horse being a bad example and more to do with keeping this noble animal from becoming embroiled in these nasty politics.

[Chauncy]

With all this talk of Creationism and the points of view that are represented I see that there is one thing missing from the Creationist camp.

If all that we know was created by a single intelligent being, the Earth specifically then exactly WHY did he do it?

The Bible gives no explaination, it starts while the creation process is about to start.

So why did this creator jump up one day and decide to create humans the species of Earth?

[tkr9]

I didn't drop the point. I went to bed! It was three in the morning where I am!

As for the saddle, I have ridden without one and was not in pain thank you very much. It makes it easier for the rider yes but the principle point is to spread the rider's weight and make it more comfortable for the horse. I have ridden on saddles that were certainly not evolved for my behind! V painful actually.

As for ignoring one or two points I have an appalling memory and when I nip into the add a reply section only remember one or two salient points. And there is no need to get touchy about it. This is a discussion, not the House of Commons.

Now, please recall, that the fact that when we were chasing giant goodness knows what ineffectually with pointy sticks, this rather handy animal appeared. Now that's all very well, but it might not have turned up at all. Now of all the things in life I do believe in coincidence is not one of them. Plodding about, broad backed, noble hearted and sweet tempered, appeared a four legged animal with a place for a rider to sit in comfort and harmony at the strongest point of its back and balance. It was fleet, agile, brave and willing. Everything man needed to go about his business with greater efficiency.

If it had not turned up, history would have plodded along at half the speed it did and we would not have advanced as we did. But that point is a useless one. Useless because arguing a useful animal might not have turned up is beside the point. I'm debating that the perfect animal for advancing civilisation DID turn up. That we utilised it shows our ingenuity yes, but no other animal IS quite so suited to the tasks horses are. Camels to a certain extent yes, oxen to a certain extent yes, but the horse does both and in most cases better,

My point is that the right animal turned up at the right time. And I'm using horses as an analogy, similar to my point about eclipses. These things happen in the right place at the right time, and evolution doesn't play that game. A horse didn't evolve into what we needed, it was already what we needed. That selective breeding EVENTUALLY made it taller and stronger and faster is after the effect, not the cause of it.

Please pose queiries one at a time so I can remember to reply to the salient points when I go into the add a reply section.

[tkr9]

As to the why I often wonder that. The best answer I can come up with is if the Universe existed without us, the sun blazing in an azure sky, or the rain sweeping like a curtain of silver across the horizon, or mountains slumbering in the lilac morning mist, who would appreciate it? It would be a waste to have such an incredible world and have no one there to stand back and actually look at it.

[Chauncy]

Now, please recall, that the fact that when we were chasing giant goodness knows what ineffectually with pointy sticks, this rather handy animal appeared.

No!.....the animal was there before the pointy sticks and would be there if there was no pointy sticks!

Plodding about, broad backed, noble hearted and sweet tempered, appeared a four legged animal with a place for a rider to sit in comfort and harmony at the strongest point of its back and balance. It was fleet, agile, brave and willing. Everything man needed to go about his business with greater efficiency.

It didn't appear!...no offense but it is egotistical to believe they appeared for our use, they were always there the point that we chose to implement them is not their point of creation!!.....as I said before if the horse had quills we would have chose another animal.....utilizing the horse is no different then the camels used in the desert, the dogs in the arctic, or the chickens in the coop!!!

And we did in fact implement this animal for its ideal characteristics as with all animals we utilize for whatever ends!!!

Edited May 23, 2004 by Chauncy

[RamboIII]

Here is another pitiful attempt to prove God's existence:

The Ontological Argument

Our idea of God is an idea of a perfect being.

A perfect being must have every perfection.

It is better to exist than not to exist.

It is better to exist in reality than merely to exist in someones mind.

Therefore our idea of a perfect being is an idea of a being which exists in reality.

Therefore the Perfect Being (God) exists in reality.

...Wow, I bet Descartes felt so proud when he wrote this... I wonder if he falied to noticed he didn't prove that there actually was a perfect being, he just basically set the criteria. Nice try though.

PS. I would appreciate it if other people replied to confirm my thoughts that this argument is bogus.

[Big cheese]

Im sorry I find this argument regarding horse’s absolutely ludicrous .Applying this logic one would assume cows would follow the same suit as would all agricultural live stock not to mention fish and one would expect to find no wild counterparts separate and without human contact. Again the creationism camp apply anthromorphic attitudes to natural environmental mechanisms. Forgetting that we can trace back the lineage for horses back to when they were mere feet high and that, that lineage predates any human interaction we have cultures that didn’t even use horses as industrial tools to suggest that they are designed for our manipulation is arrogant to the extreme .It is also implied "the right animal at the right time" Nonsense complete rubbish one could argue the same for trees ,crops infact any natural resource Simply put over whelming evidence shows that a lot of what we use was here before us and will continue in our absence our existence is not a prerequisite to there’s . It an easy and nieve error to mistake human inventiveness for design and purpose after all it’s our inventiveness that makes us dominant in our evolutionary niesh.

The thing I find really amusing with the creationism concept it is so at odds with what you find in nature if you take the time to dig a little deeper than face values you see how utterly ridiculous it is and is so utterly without factual evidence to support its bold claims and to make such claims one would expect to see evidence of equal measure yet to this date non is put forth surprise surprise

Edited June 21, 2006 by Big cheese

[Imaginary Friend]

And that is what I call intelligent design of equines....

(Sic).....And come on. Evolution design the Arabian or Andalusian. Da Vinci and Van Gogh couldn't conjure up something so beautifully constructed. I scarcely think genes could!

You would do well to know of Da Vinci's horse, before claiming he could not construct the magnificence of the animal.

DaVinci's Horse

50 Million years of Horse Evolution

Re: Genetics. If it weren't for genetics, there would be no horses! Certainly you know that.

I'm still trying to wrap my mind around the comment that the design of a saddle and the anatomy of a horses back, are coincidental! Saddle = evidence of intelligence design.

Further, relative to that equine anatomy being especially conducive to riders, have you ever watched the rodeo bull riding event? Have you ever saddled a Black Angus? Sit astride the back of a cow and apply the heels as one would to a horse, and one will get the same reflexive action as that which attends horses.

And while one may laugh and say; but people don't ride bulls/cows, stupid! Think again. People have been riding bulls since at least the Roman era! (Link)

Otherwise, one might consider, if they believe in intelligent design, that evolution (change) is that intelligence's implanted mechanism within it's creations, so as to insure it's survival as the climate and planet it inhabits, alters. Geology renders evidence our planet has had dramatic climactic shifts since it's creation. To imagine evolution is not reality is to say that no matter how much the home/sustaining environment, of a species altered, every thing on that planet has never changed from the time it was first created.

If this were the case, humans would be extinct, as would other species. But that would be immaterial because we would not be here to draw the conclusion or to witness the record.

"God created a number of possibilities in case some of his prototypes failed -- that is the meaning of EVOLUTION. " British Novelist,Graham Greene (1904-1991)

Edited June 21, 2006 by Imaginary Friend