What does Intelligent Design prove?

[man]

What does Intelligent Design prove?

I must have asked that question a thousand times in various forms and comment sections and not one single person has ever said, It proves there is a god.

Why is that?

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 89 by RonE]

See that's what makes evolution work.

That's the usual response to every question, because since there is no evidence, it it just easier to say, "evolution works".
When in fact, no where is it even documented, that a working model exists.
All of the experiments ran, have not even produced one.

Yet it works.
Of course it works. That's why it's not true science.

[Donray]

I just asked a question. Can you answer it... for once?

Or am I the one to do all the answering?

You don't answer any questions.

I asked your logic on Neanderthals and you don't respond.

I asked about why crested virus and you don't respond.

I asked about why you god created man with a spine that is better for a four legged animal and you don't respond.

You have responded to very few questions and those that you do, you present no evidence for position except for the god of gaps theory.

[RonE]

[Replying to post 91 by theStudent]

Okay, so let's go back to the idea of intelligent design. Since you are so well versed in science and scientific methods I challenge you to give me a scientific based proof that your god exists. This has to conform to generally accepted scientific methods, you know what they are cause you have studied science and you like science. So here's your chance. You cannot have intelligent design without a designer so prove your designer exists.

[RonE]

Thestudent, I'm eagerly awaiting your reply to my last post,

Or am I the one to do all the answering?

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 94 by RonE]

I am not usually online that regular.

I wonder if I did what you do, if I would get you to show me the evidence, that you can get a new pair of eyes from mutations?
Hello RonE.
I'm waiting for your answer. Are you there?

Or maybe I should try the other one.
Refuse to answer your question, and ask you again, or ask another.

However, I'm a fair guy, as I said before, even though I don't have to, for the record, here I am answering another of your questions, although you haven't answered mine.


Let's say, you have a two year old boy.
One day he says to you, "I can prove to you, that you are my daddy."
"Okay, go ahead." you say.
So your little boy proceeds to tell you, he knows that you are his daddy, becase you are here with his mommy, and you bring things for him.
You laugh with him, and tell him how smart he is.

We know though, that your son hasn't proven anything.
He has just, in his innocence, made a spectaculation.

When he gets much older, perhaps in his teens, he may be able to prove it, by perhaps looking at the results of a DNA test.

It is clear that a two year old who is not on the level of an adult, cannot process the same information as an adult.
I put scientists in the category of the two year old, although that's above his level, in comparison to any creator.

He cannot, in his science labs, prove whether God is, or is not.
NOTE* please - in his science labs.
He was born yesterday - so to speak - a mere infant.

In order to prove whether God exists or not, he must grow up, and process things, not at his level of understanding, but at the level of a higher understanding.
Of course, he can never reach the level of any existence that is super intelligent, but just as a child who is growing up amidst adults does... He needs to do.
Sit down and learn.

I have never met a child who is not eager to learn.

If a scientist were willing to recognize the above, and humble himself, then he would find the proof that an all wise creator does exist.
If they did so, they wouldn't be basing their evidence on speculation after speculation after speculation.

For that reason, they cannot reach the level of some in the past, who saw things that can be considered scientific. But because they are not understood, and are even outrightly rejected, they aren't considered scientific.
Like walking on water; Parting the sea; Raising the dead; Instantly restoring a dried up hand, etc., etc.
However, if man's knowledge is so limited, and the so-called greatest experts - the scientists - see things that defy their understanding of what is natural, why do they close their eyes to the probability of miracles, being performed by a supernatural being?
And as I would say again - yet they continue looking for E.T.

I personally believe, as I said before, it's an agenda, to rid God and religion, from the minds of persons.
But, they have failed, because they will never succeed with people of faith. So that even if they kill those individuals, they still fail.
I won't elaborate on why they fail, nor can I get into the

scientific based proof that your god exists

since apparently, I will be breaking forum rules.

As regards the issue of how it is that God could always exist, the same information I previously mentioned applies.
One scientist demonstrated the correct attitude imo.

What I cannot create, I do not understand.

- RICHARD FEYNMAN, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. I, 8-2

[Donray]

theStudent why are you afraid to answer my questions?

Because you theory has not explanation for most questions about creationism? ID is just Creationism as the courts have ruled.

[Donray]

[Replying to post 94 by RonE]

I am not usually online that regular.

I wonder if I did what you do, if I would get you to show me the evidence, that you can get a new pair of eyes from mutations?
Hello RonE.
I'm waiting for your answer. Are you there?

Or maybe I should try the other one.
Refuse to answer your question, and ask you again, or ask another.

However, I'm a fair guy, as I said before, even though I don't have to, for the record, here I am answering another of your questions, although you haven't answered mine.


Let's say, you have a two year old boy.
One day he says to you, "I can prove to you, that you are my daddy."
"Okay, go ahead." you say.
So your little boy proceeds to tell you, he knows that you are his daddy, becase you are here with his mommy, and you bring things for him.
You laugh with him, and tell him how smart he is.

We know though, that your son hasn't proven anything.
He has just, in his innocence, made a spectaculation.

When he gets much older, perhaps in his teens, he may be able to prove it, by perhaps looking at the results of a DNA test.

It is clear that a two year old who is not on the level of an adult, cannot process the same information as an adult.
I put scientists in the category of the two year old, although that's above his level, in comparison to any creator.

He cannot, in his science labs, prove whether God is, or is not.
NOTE* please - in his science labs.
He was born yesterday - so to speak - a mere infant.

In order to prove whether God exists or not, he must grow up, and process things, not at his level of understanding, but at the level of a higher understanding.
Of course, he can never reach the level of any existence that is super intelligent, but just as a child who is growing up amidst adults does... He needs to do.
Sit down and learn.

I have never met a child who is not eager to learn.

If a scientist were willing to recognize the above, and humble himself, then he would find the proof that an all wise creator does exist.
If they did so, they wouldn't be basing their evidence on speculation after speculation after speculation.

For that reason, they cannot reach the level of some in the past, who saw things that can be considered scientific. But because they are not understood, and are even outrightly rejected, they aren't considered scientific.
Like walking on water; Parting the sea; Raising the dead; Instantly restoring a dried up hand, etc., etc.
However, if man's knowledge is so limited, and the so-called greatest experts - the scientists - see things that defy their understanding of what is natural, why do they close their eyes to the probability of miracles, being performed by a supernatural being?
And as I would say again - yet they continue looking for E.T.

I personally believe, as I said before, it's an agenda, to rid God and religion, from the minds of persons.
But, they have failed, because they will never succeed with people of faith. So that even if they kill those individuals, they still fail.
I won't elaborate on why they fail, nor can I get into the

scientific based proof that your god exists

since apparently, I will be breaking forum rules.

As regards the issue of how it is that God could always exist, the same information I previously mentioned applies.
One scientist demonstrated the correct attitude imo.

What I cannot create, I do not understand.

- RICHARD FEYNMAN, The Feynman Lectures on Physics, Vol. I, 8-2

All you do is say nothing in a lot words.

Just admit that you nor anyone else can prove God exists.

Why can't you just admit that you believe God exists and nothing anyone can say will change your mind.

You are one of these that refuse to learn new things and just repeat over and over what you have been brainwashed since birth to believe.

That is why you cannot answer a simple question about Neanderthals.

[theStudent]

[Replying to post 96 by Donray]

I'm not afraid to answer your questions.
Did I not answer your questions?
When I answered your questions, what was your response?

[Donray]

[Replying to post 98 by theStudent]

You seem to have some memory problems.

You never replied on how Neanderthals fit into you logic. Did God create them and then murder all of them? Remember that many people European decent have some Neanderthal DNA.

You addressed bacteria put not why your god created virus and what is there benefit to this ID.

You also never addressed why your god created a bad spin in man that looks like it was designed for a four legged animal.

[man]

theStudent, I've been sitting here watching this thread for a few days now and it is abundantly clear that it's theStudent who does NOT answer questions.