If the atom, in all it’s magnificent complexity, structure and functionality, wasn’t exactly as it is, you wouldn’t be here to marvel at how the creator created it so perfectly for your existence. Some other type of being would be here marveling at how it was so perfect for his existence.
Nah, whether “building block” is a properly descriptive term for the atom is not at the heart of this debate at all, in fact, watch as I completely remove the term from the sentence I put it in:
I don’t agree with you at all. I’m asking you to prove that complexity requires a designer. There’s absolutely no reason to believe that it does.
That’s for you o explain, not us. You have to explain why a magic super genie is necessary to “create” an atom, and why matter couldn’t have just frozen out of the energy of the Big Bang like the evidence shows.
Well, compare it to the idea that the atom came together all by itself, or through a process that requires no intelligence.
Atoms don’t breed and reproduce, so you can’t argue they “evolved”.
Current physics theory indicates they may be converted from energy. They are not living things. There is no need for them to breed or reproduce or evolve. Do you understand the difference between living and non-living systems?
Your entire argument seems to be that the idea of a Creator is more pleasing to you than not having a creator.
I think you’re confusing me with Christian Creation fundamentalists.
I have nothing against investigating where the atom’s structure, function and complexity came from. But given that this investigation has so far turned up nothing, that counts for their being zero evidence against what, on face value, appears to be something that was meticulously designed.
Matter came from energy. This is physics 101.
Atoms may not breed or reproduce, but they are formed by physical laws same as everything else. There is nothing intelligent or spiritual about it. The concept of nucleosynethesis is a good place to start if you don’t understand the origins of atoms.
Who told you that “investigation has turned up nothing?” You appear to have some large gaps in your knowledge here, but don’t project that onto everybody else.
Absolutely no reason to believe that complexity requires a designer?
I’m amazed you’d align yourself to such a concrete, no-room-to-move statement, but let’s think of it this way:
I’m claiming it makes more sense that complexity (at least something as complex as the atom) more likely than not requires a designer.
Quite well. You’ve obviously misunderstood, or I wasn’t clear enough, on something I said.
Not sure what you mean by “more pleasing”.
Necessary is your word, not mine.
I said it’s more sensical to believe the atom was designed/created.
What kind of scientific argument is “it makes more sense”?
The facts in this case don’t support that assertion. The facts as understood so far indicate no need whatsoever for a creator. Adding a creator to the mix only makes it even more complex.
Yep… I am aware what atoms are.
Incidentally, could you give a single example of something that “appears to be designed?” Can you provide an example of something which could not have come into existence by purely material processes?
I don’t think so
Not sure what you mean by “more sensical”.
No, I just think that using “God did it” as an explanation is a lazy way of thinking. You might as well claim atoms are created by magic.
From my limited knowledge of physics, it seems that in this universe, at this particular time, atoms cannot be different from how they are. There’s no need to think they’re designed at all. Someone else here may be able to explain it a lot better (or correct me).
Absolutely zero that has ever been shown.
I’ll marry it and fuck it and have kids with it.
And I’m asking you what your basis is for that assertion. What is there in the universe which cannot have come into existence without magic?
I think that your belief in a creator for the atom is more likely based on convenience than evidence.