Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
why that was nice
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cotjones" data-source="post: 6156572" data-attributes="member: 573988"><p>Again the point you are missing is that those are not the only 2 possible outcomes, they are simply the best outcomes by which to base a choice. If you are playing craps you can't possibly know what the outcome will be but you know it's a better decision to choose red or black than ...Orange?</p><p></p><p>aquinas yes paley no. The arguement isn't actually that things are so complex that they require a designer, but that some things cannot happen from pure chance and require conscious input, which is of course just as speculative as anything.</p><p></p><p>Exactly, but yet while this argument is not any less supported than the argument that your chair will hold your weight, yet you believe it. My point is that in theoretical rhetoric, skepticism has a tenancy to reinforce the skeptic. A problem that has plagued man kind throughout history.</p><p></p><p> From a certain point of view, but i would go farther to say that all things are irreducibly complex. I remember distinctly in elementary science, we were being taught about atoms, and that they are made from protons, neutrons and electrons. I raised my hand and asked "what are they made of?" I got the answer "nothing they are the smallest parts you can't get any smaller." we now know this to be false, and there is no smallest level. It would seem that all things are indeed infinitely complex. and we are simply swimming upstream on an eternal river trying to discover the end that doesn't exist.</p><p></p><p>wrong, you turned my own argument on me. My point is that everything YOU believe is based on the fact you cannot prove otherwise. how am i different? for that matter how would you be different if you believed what i do? you simply would not.</p><p></p><p>Gravity is a relatively completely unknown force, if you can figure out what causes it you'll probably win a nobel prize. but if you would like an example. gravity makes movement and digestion require more energy. Therefore requiring more cellular respiration expediting the decay of the organism. You must eat more food to stay alive because of gravity. Everything fights life in one way or another, the path of least resistance is for life to die out and not come back. why does it not, evolution being a natural force would not alone counteract "nature"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cotjones, post: 6156572, member: 573988"] Again the point you are missing is that those are not the only 2 possible outcomes, they are simply the best outcomes by which to base a choice. If you are playing craps you can't possibly know what the outcome will be but you know it's a better decision to choose red or black than ...Orange? aquinas yes paley no. The arguement isn't actually that things are so complex that they require a designer, but that some things cannot happen from pure chance and require conscious input, which is of course just as speculative as anything. Exactly, but yet while this argument is not any less supported than the argument that your chair will hold your weight, yet you believe it. My point is that in theoretical rhetoric, skepticism has a tenancy to reinforce the skeptic. A problem that has plagued man kind throughout history. From a certain point of view, but i would go farther to say that all things are irreducibly complex. I remember distinctly in elementary science, we were being taught about atoms, and that they are made from protons, neutrons and electrons. I raised my hand and asked "what are they made of?" I got the answer "nothing they are the smallest parts you can't get any smaller." we now know this to be false, and there is no smallest level. It would seem that all things are indeed infinitely complex. and we are simply swimming upstream on an eternal river trying to discover the end that doesn't exist. wrong, you turned my own argument on me. My point is that everything YOU believe is based on the fact you cannot prove otherwise. how am i different? for that matter how would you be different if you believed what i do? you simply would not. Gravity is a relatively completely unknown force, if you can figure out what causes it you'll probably win a nobel prize. but if you would like an example. gravity makes movement and digestion require more energy. Therefore requiring more cellular respiration expediting the decay of the organism. You must eat more food to stay alive because of gravity. Everything fights life in one way or another, the path of least resistance is for life to die out and not come back. why does it not, evolution being a natural force would not alone counteract "nature" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
why that was nice
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
