Quote:
So I'm just going to start out with this, and say, a majority of athiests most of the time say "there's no way to prove there's a God" But I say, what evidence is there that proves there is NOT a God?
Being a soft atheist, i don't particularly need a lot of proof that there's not a god from the theist. I do, of course, need proof from the theist that their particular assertion has any sort of proof.

Quote:
Everytime I look at design, like a watch, i know there's a designer.
When you look at a river, is there a riverer? How about a cloud? Does it demand a clouder? Is a mountain implicit proof of a mountainer?

I know machines are crafted because i have seen crafter make machines. There are certain elements to design that imply a process. One would be simplicity, not complexity. Designers that are worth a fart try to remove excess material, excess steps, poor engineering. A perfect designer would produce a perfectly simple system. Biology, though, is largely a litany of waste. Just look at how much sperm is produced to form one child. Look at how many animals don't make it to adulthood.

If the very order of the universe is such that it's obviously a design, why does SETI not conclude that each and every signal they pick up is the product of design?


And ultimately, if the order of the universe demands a designer, doesn't the perfection of God demand another designer? And doesn't THAT designer demand a designer? At what arbitrary point do you decide that THIS designer is an exception to the rule you used to decide the previous one existed?

Quote:
There's 3 billion pieces to our DNA. How much time would I need for that to happen by chance? It would've had to happen on the very first "roll" so to speak. So if it happens on the first roll, does it speak of chance, or of a creator who made it?
Mark Cahill doesn't seem to be all that 'awesome.' The whole idea of common ancestry is that the 3billion or whatever amount of our DNA didn't develop perfectly on one die roll.
And one of the more important concepts of probability math is that probability is meaningless in evaluation of events that already happened.

I played poker last night. I got a hand. Four eights and an ace (of clubs). The odds against that hand are one out of 52x51x50x49x48. Do those odds in any way argue that i did not, infact, have that hand? No. They only have meaning NOW if i'm going to wager on having the same hand again tomorrow.


Quote:
Now the funny thing about that is, the only thing that you don't find when you study fossil records, is transitional forms.
Actually, since evolution occurs in infinitesimal steps, every fossil is a transitional form.


Quote:
Piltdown man, Peking man, Nebraska man, they'll show you all the different ones,
Find any modern textbook that uses Piltdown man? Find any textbook EVER that used Nebraska man?

Quote:
40 years after they did that, the people who thought it was a man, actually proved that it was from an extinct pig.
Wow. Cahill is a liar. Or something. The Nebraska Man was discovered in 1917. It was disproven in 1927. Even graduates from BYU can do that math. The drawing of Nebraska Man was done by a paper illustrator, not a scientist.

What i really like, though, about both Pilty and Neby was that it was scientists that eventually discovered the truth about both of them. That's what science is supposed to do. Reexamine, question, reevaluate. A bit slow, maybe, but an onward march towards the truth.

Quote:
if you put a computer, a robot, a 747 jet, and a worm next to eachother, and you ask any scientist which is the most intricately designed, and out of those four, they would all say the worm.
Okay. Now, out of a robot, a 747, a worm, a computer and God, which is the most powerful and perfect? Is there any way that God could just have happened? If you're willing, by any stretch of the imagination, to allow that god himself may not have required a creator, how can you not allow, by some stretch of the imagination, that the universe may not have required a creator?