carl wrote:
Even scientists who put their faith in evolution actually question evolution because of the nanotechnology which makes up our bodies:
Evolution requires faith?
Do you have any idea what bollocks you're now spouting, Carl?
Perhaps best to retreat from this contention rapidly, unless of course you actually wish to learn why you're wrong.
carl wrote:"It is the sheer universality of PERFECTION, the fact that everywhere we look, to whatever depth we look, we find an elegance and ingenuity of an absolutely TRANSCENDING quality, which so mitigates against the idea of chance. Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a reality, the smallest element of which - a functional protein or gene - is COMPLEX BEYOND OUR OWN CREATIVE CAPABILITIES, a reality which is the very antithesis of chance, which EXCELS IN EVERY SENSE ANYTHING PRODUCED BY THE INTELLIGENCE OF MAN?" (M Denton, PhD, Molecular Biologist)
Yep, Denton's wrong too.
carl wrote:Comment: When we see a hi-tech device, we know several things about its maker:
1) High intelligence, and in the case of the single biological cell, absolute supreme intelligence.
2) Extreme care in making the device.
3) Device made with specific intent/purpose.
A hi-tech device is not analogous to a living organism. It doesn't hold the properties by which life evolved, namely DNA and inheritance.
See the giraffe's recurrent laryngeal nerve for an example of a biological structure that CANNOT be explained by reference to intelligence, to design, to purpose, to intent.
One black swan, Carl.
carl wrote:These 3 assumptions are made by everyone on this planet, unless of course, it involves the possibility of a supreme being.
Of when people possess sufficient knowledge to see that there's no magic man behind the curtain, just plain old natural mechanisms generating complexity.