One of core logical flaws with intelligent design theory is that while it implicitly claims that complex organic systems cannot arise from natural causality and that therefore an "intelligence" directed evolution, it completely fails to explain how the alleged intelligence came into being or where it came from; it just passes the buck. (It's a rehash of the logical fallacy of the First Cause argument, dressed up as being a self-proclaimed "intelligent" theory.)
Oh God this again? Why do ignorants like you never look up your stupid arguments? Moron:
1. You lacked the intelligence to apply your own argument to your own theory: what caused the supposed big magic man making explosion (a massive over simplification of course)? Then moron: what caused what caused that, etc. x infinity. Why do ignorants like yourself not see such an obvious flaw in your own anti-God babble? So your argument comes to a contradictory hypocritical nothing. If ignorants like you looked up your endless arguments against God, you'd see there are already logical answers to them on the net, but you don't care to research, people like you just want to toss your feelings around to show how smart you are, and to what end? Did you get famous from this post, did you meet your dream husband or wife? So stupid. So, clearly NOT EVERYTHING NEEDS A CAUSE, THE ONE THING THAT DOES NOT, WOULD BE GOD. Now why then, would the magic life and emotion and soul making bomb FROM NOTHING, NOT<---- NOT<----, ONE MORE TIME, NOT<----- REQUIRE A CAUSE? So your first argument falls flat and never explodes. Now should I read the rest of your opinion? I will since your rant was short, but the apostle Paul, whom God spoke through, said, "avoid arguments of ignorance", so I'm not getting deep into the obvious, especially being that I've refuted 500+ arguments against the Bible and have heard all this stupidity before.
"Does the new movie, Expelled, No Intelligence Allowed, explain where this transcendental being responsible for the intelligent design came from?"
See above. Your argument, besides a fallacy of throwing the baby out with the bathwater (cuz u aren't explained every little detail --the movie would never end moron) and a fallacy of misdirection (diverting peoples' attention away from the facts in the movie that show there's no magical fossil columns or any and evidence for evolution and plenty against it and the Big Bang, let alone no evidence for it period) is also is a fallacy called BEGGING THE QUESTION, meaning it has no point. Your using the same argument that atheists who "love" "science" use to attack Christians, true or false ones to defend THEIR VERSION of science "we're still learning, we don't have all the answers yet, just because we don't know such and such doesn't mean (relativity/evolution/the big bang/heliocentrism/global warming etc./why liberalism is thee way of life) isn't true, and it's self correcting". But oh, if a Christian can't explain in TEN SECONDS as one atheist moron in a chatroom gave me whatever the atheist or anti-Christian "wants to know" (uh huh, if you did you'd research sincerely yourself) then the atheist mocks, makes a tirade, ignores, blocks, repeats some nonsense, literally, or says, "I don't care" or "you're ranting".
"Does it explain how an omnipotent, omniscient being--surely something far, far more complex than human life on this earth--could just exist or come into existence on its own."
You're ranting redundantly.
"Does it explain why, how if it's invalid to believe that evolution occurred naturally, why it's valid to believe that a deity existed and created everything without having to explain where the deity came from?"
You're ranting redundantly.
"I can definitely understand why folks peddling religion"
Fallacy: ad hominem attack via stereotype: you've lumped in billions (many billions) of people as all sellers of something cheap (and it's also bigoted as it pretends atheists never do the same, and misdirects people from the super obvious: history: it wasn't atheists that came up with all the wonderful inventions in the world that spurred on more, and allowed Darwin to come up with his nonsense, to peddle his nonsense, but it was a religion-driven world that did. Even atheist Tesla copied the work of others and was raised by a religious dad. He didn't "evolve" in a religious vacuum, and Tesla recognized the value at least of religion.
"under the dishonest guise of reason might be "expelled" from the academic debate"
That's what you're doing now as I've pointed out blind hypocrite. And you've made another ad hominem attack and begging the question fallacy with that line: what is your evidence it's under a dishonest guise? A guise for what? What is Ben's religion? Did he peddle Judaism or Christianity? Stupid libeler. You, under the guise of making an intelligent argument, are peddling atheism and a false science. You've not made any scientific arguments or intelligent ones, but have rehashed what is already all over the net and in libraries. You and millions of other atheists think you're Christopher Columbuses of religion, yet you don't bother studying. The "island" is already occupied you idiots, learn something from the natives and stop seeing them as dupes to rape and extort and use as slaves to mine things for you.
"for failure to prove the existence of the intelligent designer and to explain its origins."
Huh? Who failed whatsit where doing what? HUH? Whatever you said.
"They're basically advocating religious belief"
See above. And who is "they"? Is this a cult movie? It's people with different beliefs and some are atheists or agnostic, those in the steady state theory of the universe at least.
"under the implicit guise of reason."
And you've ranted. ignorants like you think if you use phrases like that that sound high and wise that you've said something implicitly reasonable, and must therefore know what you're talking about, exactly what that movie pointed out is not always the case. It's not the fancy talkers or people who see a book that says, "Words You Should Know" who then read it and use those words like they've become an expert in something that know what they are talking about, but the people who do sincere patient research, who often suffer to learn something, like a scientist who spends long hours to find the right formula for something doing calculations to no end, ignoring the nonsense of evolution, big bangism and relativity, realizing it has nothing to do with and will never help him come up with whatever he's trying to invent, and also those who have had their spiritual eyes opened by God, especially to understand how to be forgiven of their sins (and it's not as the world teaches, the endless cults and gargantuan one of Catholicism, so large that it is "the world" - you can't earn salvation from Hell.)
Take my "rant" to heart, because it's no rant.
Too bad I couldn't answer you soon after you made your rant, I might have been able to block the damage it no doubt did. God is always on time anyways.
- a scholar of logical fallacies and religion and certain parts of history and science researcher, unlike you.
Facebook
Twitter