Monday, 28 July 2014

A poorly designed argument for intelligent design

The following argument is one you will often hear from creationists and IDiots.

"There are two reasons to suppose life has a designer: One, it bears features common to things known to be designed, and secondly, there are no demonstrable physical causes that could by themselves have produced life as an effect."

The first time this week, I actually gave this argument some thought besides giving it the normal scoff of how stupid as it contradicts everything we know about the evolutionary sciences. Turns out thinking about it makes this idea even more stupid than I initially thought. So apparently humans are designed as they bear resemblence to things we know to be designed. So here are a few pictures of things we know have been designed.

In contrast here is a Human body which clearly is designed. You can see all the cogs and the wheels for improved transport. You can see the interface between the different sections that run different bodily operation. Additionally, see the ease with which you can exchange parts when something gets damaged. Note the metallic sheen of the skin protecting the fragile inner core components. Notice the dripping sarcasm in this paragraph.

If you seriously think this is a good argument for design you seriously need help.

As an added extra the person using this same argument had this gem of knowledge:
"Un-natural forms: If you find a rock in the (American) woods in a certain shape, you will know right off that you have found an Indian arrowhead. Why? Because rocks do not form in that shape naturally."
Here is picture of flint as a counter rebuttal to this argument.
Some times a picture really is worth a thousand words, or in this case a debunked creationist argument.