Why?.

I honestly could careless how PLAINLY SIMPLE the necessity of God is. Belief in a god is a personal choice, and this isn't the thread to discuss it. There's a God thread for a reason.

It is clearly stated in the rules that there is no insulting others in these forums. If you don't like it, post somewhere else.

Let's pretend for a minute that this is a thread for whether or not creationism should be taught in schools alongside evolution and see where that takes us. I'm not saying getting off topic is that bad; I do it all the time, but I would like to see how personal beliefs go along with what you want children taught.

I've stated my thoughts on this earlier in the thread but it boils down to whatever is supported by scientific evidence should be taught. At this point, only evolution theories pass that test. If in the future one of the theories of creationism meet those qualifications, then it should be taught as well.

And I would also be happy to hear any other well-founded theory of the origin of species. But there is none. Has no one been looking, or is there a good reason evolution has few challengers in the world of science?

Universal common descent at this point has NO good challengers. There is too much implicit evidence for evolution for there to be any theory with even a third the validity of it.

My belief on the ORIGIN of the species, in a physical sense, is the common one supported by the majority: amino acids, other compounds or proteins mixing together somewhere, forming organic compounds ( or single cell life as well) which, in the right environment, evolves over time into higher taxon. Where this could have happened? I'm not sure, so I'll keep my speculations to myself.

I think it's more that there aren't enough truly objective studies into the subject. Many of them start out with an idea then seek evidence to prove that.

It's also a personal choice to believe dinosaurs existedor to believe in gravity...
However, you're right that it's a personal choice none-the-less, but, damn, isn't there any care for other people as in wanting to inform them how unreasonable their opinions? ( Yes, I do care about those I criticize or even insult)

The belief in God itself is almost fundamental in "intelligent design/ creationsim", danger--your points have no strength. No good discussion can arise from " ID/ creationism" without discussing/ trying to establish the existence of God.

But fine, you're the authority here ( for who knows why, I don't know) and you, only by default, win.

Congrats.

That sounds like something Obdurate would say, only you didn't tell him he was a fascist. Remember that next time. Aside from that, I find I have nothing else to say. I thought I had something but I don't.

I think that the point The_the is basically trying to make is that God has to exist, because nothing comes before something. Otherwise, things would just be *created.*

The problem with arguing that Science doesn't support God is the fact that God can transcend science. Maybe god made the universe, and then stuck science in to make it work. You can't simply say that God doesn't exist because science doesn't show it, because, if God does indeed exist, he is so far above Scientific law that it becomes stupid to make that comparison.

Then, you can say "well, then what created God? He can't just be infinite." Ah, but that is only because Science says that he can't be. Maybe God created time after he set up the universe to, again, just like with science, make things work.

Science and math themselves are based on conjecture, so you can't come to ultimately definitive conclusions using either.