The Watchmaker Argument
Posted by James on September 9, 2012 · 25 Comments
This is a clip from episode 500 of “The Atheist Experience” TV show Watch the TV show at www.atheist-experience.com
Comments
25 Responses to “The Watchmaker Argument”Speak Your Mind
Tell us what you're thinking...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
your? welcome ^^
Thanks for your permission..I? guess..o_O
An argument from ignorance is not a proof of god buth you can believe it, it’s your brain so go? ahead believe what you want 🙂
even if the watchmaker argument made sense, it wouldnt mean one god and not another is the right? one.
i see a watch, it was made not by a watchmaker but by workers in a factory, designers, CEOs and many more…logical conclusion, zeus and the rest of the gods made the? universe.
The watchmaker argument only applies to inanimate, inorganic objects. It does not apply to organic chemistry? and biology that have the capacity to change and grow in complexity when energy is added to the system, i.e. when the sun shines on our planet.
This guy is taking the watchmaker idea LITERALLY! It’s not about man made watches..lol..YOU are the watch..the world is the watch!!! WHO or what is the watchmaker? That is the whole point of the debate. Every minute particle around us is govern by laws of physics..a clockwork universe as it were..it’s obvious Intelligent design leads to the question..who is the designer? Just random, “? big bang ” luck or is there more to it? This debate is as old as the written word..God wins. 🙂
I hope you’re trolling. The watchmaker argument is? one of the lamest analogies religious people use to try and justify their beliefs in fairy tales. It would be the lamest if it wasn’t for the fact is has a lot of competition in the lame and stupid factor of pro religion arguments.
He just proved that he recognise a designer. What a idiot. U can tell a difference from a watch from a other watch if u look closely. Just like humans we all the same but we are different and u could tell by DNA.? Design. Dumb fucks
“Even if all the data point to an intelligent? designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.” Dr. Scott Todd
This is the core of the atheist. Some people are incapable of faith.
You are not answering my question. Are you capable of pondering the possibility that anything at all? can be evidence??
Fine tuning isn’t evidence because all? its evidence of is that the conditions are right for life as we know it now. They appear fine tuned to us because if the conditions were different life as we know it wouldn’t be possible, but whose to say that under different conditions life wouldn’t have come to be in a different way to what we know it now? In simple terms that the universe is capable of suporting intelligent life (or ‘fine tuned’) is only evidence of itself. It doesn’t prove nething else.
What do you mean anything at all can evidence? Someone could say the earth is round and thats proof of god. What makes it evidence? I don’t simply dismiss ANY ‘evidence’ for god because I already don’t believe in god, but you didn’t present any real evidence. I don’t accept complexity because as I said it doesn’t answer the question, and? in fact adds an even more difficult question instead of it.
But why do you believe they are valid testimonys? They are talking about things that happened for the first time? in history and have never been repeated since, supposedly impossible things that go against natural law. Such claims require extremely high levels of belief upon your part, when there’s no evidence that it happened, or is even possible. That may have been there believe that jesus was the devine son of god but again I go back to if I saw a magician at work and believed it, is it true?
At least you? admit there’s no evidence for god in the natural world, a lot will insist upon that point. We’ve come down to belief, as is the case usually with the religious, as you don’t believe its all coincidental and that you believe god is supernatural and encompasses all of nature, so there probably isn’t anything more to be said at this point. However, is there any specific reason that makes you think that though?
Why do you not accept them as evidence? I see that it is not empirical because of a lack of ability to test scientifically, but non the less, complexity and fine tuning are valid hypotheses. This is what my initial question is. Do you dismiss all presented suggestions of evidence based on what Im trying to imply, that there is a God. Are you capable of pondering the? possibility that anything at all can be evidence?
I believe the gospels are valid testimonies and I find that they believed Jesus? was the divine son of God. I understand your point that just because someone says they saw something doesn’t mean its true. This very point is presented as the pharisees questioned the blind was Jesus healed in John 9.
So your answer is yes. If any testimony or evidence is presented you will naturally look for a natural explanation, understandably I? admit. And within all laws of nature you do not think anything happens for any divine purpose. I believe God is Supernatural, which encompasses all of nature. I admit if something miraculous happens there is probably a natural explanation. But I do not believe all is coincidental. Such as healing, change in circumstances and change of hearts.
Complexity of life= not evidence of a creator. Ur saying the universe is so complex that it must have been created, but such a creator would have to be infinetly more complex, so you’ve solved one question by introducing an even more difficult one. Probability of our? existence=not evidence of a creator. The fact that we exist is evidence that we exist. Nothing else. Were those your only reasons, because they weren’t very convincing, I’m afraid.
The gospels as eye witness accounts? I could give you an eye-witness account of? a man making a rabbit appear out of an empty hat, does that mean its true also? Shroud of turin=not evidence, why do you think it is? Personal testimony is again not evidence. I could give you personal testimony that I saw a man flying. Is that evidence for a flying man?
Jesus- A. The gospels as eye witness accounts. B. The shroud of Turin. C. Personal testimony of healing of sickness or sin.
Creator- Complexity of life. Probability of our existence. (fine tuning).
A naturalist will not even bring themselves to hear the case because these evidences cannot be tested.? I contest that believing in God is to be weighed as a court case not as a scientific experiment.
You have not found reason to dismiss a creator as the source of existence, does that imlpy you have found a reason? What is that reason? You mention ‘supposed’ evidence that an atheist might dismiss, can? you give an example?
yeah. the ‘IDK’? is when you don’t know what the particular stimulus is. as for movies and inspirational events, yeah, the answer isn’t ‘dunno,’ it’s what you said.
When I listen to a specific style of music or I watch a particular movie, I sometimes get goosebumps? or I cry.
I attribute the feeling to a physical reaction to a mental response of a stimulus.
I wouldn’t attribute the feeling to “I don’t know.”
Im not referring to a hypnotic meditation or? anything. Im simply saying a serious investigation, a contemplation, a consideration. “and you will attribute it to whatever? you sought out to find when you first began to meditate.” SO do you meditate on such subjects with a preconceived mindset of doubt (skepticism)? I agree with your statement here. Why did the the pharisees bring an adulterous woman before him (John 8:3)? This meditation (investigation) can help you to get to ‘know’ Christ.