...should be evolving..? If life has no intelligent creator behind it, machines and electronic gadgets too should be evolving by now. Don't you think there is something "special" with Life?
that's a rather poor argument to say that life has no intelligent creator, because according to evolution it takes billions of years for things to evolve so you would be able to noticeably see a machine evolve, and the very idea seems extremely ridiculous
however there are many other things that point to intelligent design
actually, last time I checked electronic gadgets didn't reproduce, although if they did I would start my own playstation breeding programme and quit the day job.
well to be hoenst, who says they wont
you have no idea wht the future holds
you dont know how or why life came about any more than i do, so you cant say with any certainty that they wont evolve in the future
and this is not a good argument for the side of beleivers, despite what you may believe
no, theres nothing 'special' with life, its just life, its evolved to what it is, and it wasnt always what it is now, was there something special about it then? unlikely that you would think it was special in the begining, because it was rather crude and simplistic
and its evolved, to be a little less crude and simplistic, but spiderman, it is still very much crude and simplistic
Yeah life reproduces, and mutates at each generation, then some of them die and some of them live and reproduce another generation. Bridges and watches don't do that.
Usually those lifeforms more suited to their environment are the ones that reproduce. Thus those mutations that were useful persist in the gene pool and the species adapts.
Guess what happens when you apply those biological conditions to inanimate objects like watches - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcAq9bmCeR0
nope
life has no intelligent designer and it evolves
machines do have an intelligent designer (humans) and it does not evolve
Not only that, machines are designed (intelligently), to not evolve
No, self-replicating biological organisms doing natural (blind) selection over generations do not behave in the same fashion as man-made objects. I thought this would be obvious to everyone.
geez..you seem to have answered your own question and simultaneously ignoring the obvious: evolution neither proves or disproves the existence of a creator. Evolution is a process, not a religion.
Okay...that seemed too easy...now regarding evolving machines and gadgets--the airplanes we fly today seldom require us to be launched on a track with two guys holding onto the wings for stability. Televisions aren't funky huge cabinets with vacuum tubes and tiny screens.
Of course machines and gadgets evolve. You are only pointing out that our common experience is that human beings are gods? Even if that were true and you want to argue the bible says we are all gods, there is another surprise for you. It is called "self-assembly". yep. now we have entirely new classes of machines and gadgets evolving from self-assembly that involves no human touch. yikes.
Your last point about there being something special about life. I sure do, but I will be honest. I am not in conflict about the arguments for or against the existence of God...I simply don't know. Extreme arguments either way make no sense to me. Now, having a spiritual nature is something I can get my mind around and that does make me believe there is truly something "special" about Life. I just don't get wrapped around the axle about things I can't know....especially arguments that are irrational rhetoric. Our special Life seems capable of unraveling huge amounts of intricate evidence....what is the fight about?
I think your point might be that if electronic gadgets require an intelligent designer / creator, how much more-so do vastly complex living creatures? Even a blade of living grass is of a superior order to the Hadron Collider. Compared to a computer, the brain is immensely more intricate. Humans who created computers understand computers and can improve them, but even the most experienced, knowledgeable neurosurgeon / scientist / psychologist cannot fathom the workings of the brain. Yet all the computers involved in producing the Hadron Collider are simple, compared with the brain. So who is going to stand up and say that the brain required no intelligent design?