> Aliens? To me that's just a cop out. You don't get to what created the "Aliens". > > But Tom, how is that any more of a 'Cop-Out' than saying it was (a) God?" > > Aliens (or, at least what we define as "aliens") are limited, mortal/physical > entities. God, being (defined as) Eternal would not have had a creator.
He really didn't say anything there that he hasn't said before. He could have asked what was meant by the phrase first, but would likely not have gotten a useful reply.
> Oh yeah... This topic should probably be moved to War Room I think. > > > It should be mentioned that "Creation(ism)" shouldn't always or automatically > associated with "Intelligent Design". Look at it this way... > > Let's say you're an Archeologist digging at a site. You find a structure, it clearly > has an aspect of design to it. You wouldn't say the patterns and/or functionality it > has came about by random, unguided chance. ...Not sure I have to explain that but you > get the idea (hopefully). Anyway, you'd suppose that the object or structure you > discovered was made by an advanced, intelligent civilization. > > Case in point (regarding nature and the human body)... > > > This ratio throughout the human body (to me) shows that we could only have been > designed.
It's just the most efficient way for things to be.
> I suppose I could address the idea of "Creationism is not appropriate for Children". > Well, what does the account of creation say (pretty much)? > > http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis%201&version=KJV > > Not exactly an exhaustive account of the processes that took place to bring about > those 'things' (other than "God said Let there be _____"). So there's essentially > nothing more to 'LEARN' here except the accounts given. How these passages/verses are > perceived is up to the reader -I suppose. And, I can understand why it seems > unbelievable by itself. Obviously we weren't given the DETAILS of how all this could > have happened. > > But one clue one might consider is cymatics. Where sound waves (particularly high > frequency sounds) produce complex and sometimes symmetrical patterns in particles. > But what would cause any 'sound' before anything was there to make sound? If not > (audible) sound -then at least vibrations (since that's what sound is -waves carried > through the air and detected by our senses).
Now you're just trying to stir things up. You proposed a thing that wasn't mentioned, then tried to shoot it down.
Index 
Flat 
Re: You know it makes sense.
Reply
