Talk:Conflicting Designs
From EvoWiki
When it comes to conflicting designs, what are you claiming is the difference between multiple designers performing single designs and one designer multitasking?
As to seculars reason for a designer to create conflicting designs:
1. Entertainment 2. To ensure the organisms have the option to experience a full range of sensory and emotion. (ex. if you designed an organism who could feel pain, yet there was no 'conflicting design' to inflect pain on that organism, then the neuron sequences to indicate pain might never have the chance of being activated.) Now imagine ALL conflicting designs were eliminated, as organisms how would that effect our range of behavior and emotion? 3. To sustain and/or keep each other in check; to maintain an overall balance so at least some organisms continue and they are not all wiped out by one. Or conversely, so they don't all continue to multiply indefinitely and overpopulating the entire planet and ultimately all die off.
Of course I could go on...
I'm just a human, and I make no claim to be an intelegent Designer, yet I can sit down and make 2 things that conflict in design. So why is it unbelievable that one single intelligent designer would do the same?
What you see as conflicting designs, also appear in inanimate objects and non-organisms. Look at the Universe and the world would of chemicals and minerals and energy, of light and sound. Without conflicting design, most of what we know as how our universe works would not be. Again, and how is the conflicting designs of these non-organisms explained by evolution, it can't be those selfish genes!
Also, one other thing. Check your list again. Are you sure on some level these couldn't be 'complemetary disigns?' Think above predator-prey relationships and how they create a cycle of life that keep each population in check.
- You miss the point of "evidence". There are three possibilities:
- Evolution by natural selection + Conflicting designs
- Design by a Designer + Conflicting designs
- Design by a Designer + Only Non-Conflicting designs
- The fourth possibility:
- Evolution by natural selection + Only Non-Conflicting designs,
- does not work. Thus, evolution is a better explanation since it predicts what we see. Design is useless since it does not predict anything. The same pattern can be applied to every evidence we see.
- Evolution by natural selection + Jury-rigged design
- etc.
- Evolution by natural selection + Transitional fossils
- etc.
- Evolution by natural selection + Old-Looking Earth
- etc.
