The argument for Intelligent Design is that there are some things in the world that are so complex they must (MUST) have beed designed by a creator. There is no way that the eye, for instance, can possibly have evolved it is far too complicated.
Point 1)
Since the dawn of mankind, whenever we have not been able to understand something we have always thrown up our trembling hands and shrieked "It must be gods work"
We should be beyond that by now. We used to think that the Sun was a god. We now know that it's not. We used to think that thunder was the gods being angry at us. We now know that thunder is atmospheric electricity.
We need to stop using this childish answer of "It must be god" to explain everything that we don't yet fully understand.
Point 2)
If the ID people claim that only way there can be things as complex as eyes and bacteria in the world is if they were created by something, then the absolute logical next step is to point out that the "something" that did the creating is even more complex and, so using their same argument, the only possibly way that can be is if it too was created by something else, which in turn must have been even more complex and therefore had to have been created by something else . . . . . and so on.
Point 3)
If you're at a dinner party and the person across from you starts a converstaion about Intelligent Design and wants to convince you that it's real, the most effictive way to deal with the situation is to roll your eyes, shake your head and ask them in a loud voice "How old are you?"
If it turns out that they actually are a 5 year old then pat them kindly on the head and tell them "Santa Claus is a crock, also . . . . . sorry."
No comments:
Post a Comment