Stephen C. Meyer argues for the existence of a Creator primarily through the framework of Intelligent Design, combining insights from biology, cosmology, and philosophy. His key arguments can be summarized as follows:

Information in DNA: Meyer contends that the digital code and complex specified information found in DNA cannot be explained by naturalistic processes like evolution or chance. He argues that, just as information in software comes from a mind, so too must the information in DNA come from an intelligent source.

Origin of Life: He claims that no naturalistic explanation (chemical evolution, self-organization, etc.) adequately accounts for the origin of the first life. Therefore, he posits that a designing intelligence is the best explanation for life’s emergence.

Fine-Tuning of the Universe: Meyer points to the precise values of physical constants (e.g., gravity, the cosmological constant) that allow for life. He argues this fine-tuning is best explained not by chance or multiverse theories, but by a purposeful Creator.

Before we say it was the womans fault. May as well blame Adam for being a cheap skate, after all he only gave a rib for the woman. Just think what kind of woman he could have got if had give an arm and leg for her!

Personally, I don’t see how not knowing is proof of a creator. It doesn’t rule it out but certainly not proof. If there is an omnipotent creator that creator is either indifferent to human suffering or is some kind of sadist.

The book of Job would lead one to the latter conclusion.

So was that on day #1, or earlier?

So we covered that you think earth is only 6,000 or so years old.
We talked about the currently expanding universe other solar systems and galaxies.
We talked about arrow heads and how you don't think they are old.
We talked about carbon dating and how you don't trust the measurement.

I guess lets try to talk about ice cores then. Any beaver trapper should be able to imagine layers of ice depicting different years of time as you dig them out.

So this is NASA measuring ice cores in years... like up to 800,000 years ago. NASA.
I get most don't agree that humans have created what they are measuring, even though it spiked in 1911, and is three times higher than it has ever been in history.

They could argue for days on here about that alone but the point being... this data is older than 6,000 years old and you can look at it and its observable.

https://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/carbon-dioxide/?intent=111

Those darn facts.....

If you find one lie in the Bible should that not be enough to make one distrust all the rest?

Good point. Find one

OhioBoy, I don’t know enough about ice cores to make a definitive statement. But when I walked out to my pond, cut out a chunk of ice, and looked at it, I saw lots of layers. All of those layers were created within the current year, how does lot of layers mean each one is a year?

If science is proven wrong on one subject, should we dismiss all science?

Whats the one lie in the bible? Existing for only 6,000 years? That seems like a pretty big issue to resolve.

Read the link info its pretty interesting. Looking at your pond once a year isn't really comparing apples to apples.

"This annual rise and fall of CO2 levels is caused by seasonal cycles in photosynthesis on a massive scale. In Northern Hemisphere spring, plants come to life and draw in CO2 to fuel their growth. This begins the process of lowering the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere. In northern autumn, plant growth stops or slows down, and the whole process reverses itself. Much of the plant matter decomposes, releasing CO2 back to the atmosphere."

They are saying that CO2 is measured as being high at the end of winter b/c all of the green plants are dead and not doing the whole photosynthesis thing. So when Spring hits and things green up and plants start doing their thing then CO2 goes down and you can measure it.

Sooooo..... if you can see where winter and summer is... you can count years.

Science cannot be proven wrong. A scientific theory yes. The main reason I bow out early on these debates is all the foolishness.

BP, you are absolutely wrong.
Just Google, scientific laws that have been broken

….. who’s winning?

Believers vs Non Believers............
One thing for sure, just a second after your heart stops pumping you'll know whether God is real. Or not...................

Texas.

Ok, OhioBoy. I can’t figure how to handle that one.

Next!

There's a huge difference between distrusting and dismissing. Distrusting involves some investigation. Dismissing doesn't even involve looking at.

Keith