The life cycle of a fig is bizarre.

submitted by Canbot from files.catbox.moe

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

God proves himself by the existence of his creation and obvious design in it when considered

But how do we know that? and how do we know we were the products of a intelligent creator when their are so many flaws and imperfection within the human body?

Evolution disproves itself according to Mr. Darwin's own commentary on the concept of irriducible complexity

While i am fairly familar with dawin's work. i've never heard of that one. but after some research i can show you this quote from a wiki i found%20is%20the,selection%2C%20which%20would%20need%20all)

 

the concept of irreducible complexity has been rejected by the scientific community,[3] which regards intelligent design as pseudoscience.[4] Irreducible complexity and specified complexity, are the two main arguments used by intelligent-design proponents to support their version of the theological argument from design.[2][5]

 

Inshort. even if darwin proposed this theory. alot of scientist have rejected this claim... because it doesn't make alot of sense. and requires proof.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

How do we use our logical faculties

some of us don't, apparently

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

didn't disprove any of my points

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

did actually but unsurprisingly u missed it all

[–]BloBackEntertainment 0 insightful - 1 fun0 insightful - 0 fun1 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

no. you asserted god made everything as self evident by everything... which is bullshit logic. and then discredited evolution using darwin's theory or whatever. despite his irreducible claim being defunked by the scientific community as a whole. so please tell me what you said that disproved any of my points.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

You are incapable of understanding it, clearly, so why should I make an attempt?