>>14263665>pure imagination. i can show you guys a random log of shit, pure chaos, etc and you will still claim designGive even a single example of this nonsense
>it's not about rape, it's about conflict between sexes and there are balances. rape doesn't happen in all species, it happens in species that have Did you have a point? Rape is a good strategy in a survival of the fittest scenario. You are just babbling because you have nothing of substance to say
>O merciful designer. thanks for creating another way of sufferingHuman on human rape is a creation of humans.
>disable radiation, entropy and make transcription more accurateDo you even hear yourself talk? "disable radiation"... wtf does that even mean? Fundamentally redesign the universe to remove radiation/entropy to help soothe your delicate fee fees? Transcription is insanely accurate too. You would complain for anything short of humans and all life being immortal
>yeah WHY would the designer do this? why go though all this effort? What?? You're asking why would he make things originally perfect???? Again, you're just babbling a bunch of nonsense.
>ID proponents claim that their hypothesis answers the questions of purposefulness in nature. yet if you extend their scrutiny of nature to the designer it still doesn't make any senseJust bc you don't understand something doesn't mean it doesn't make sense.
>in the same way you can say "why would nature do X" i can also say why would the designer do X. why would the designer create a random fuckk off brown dwarf millions of light years away? why did he create ... No, I'm asking HOW evolution could do X. Nobody is asking "why" "nature" "did X" except your strawmen. So far the answer is: it can't. I don't ask "why nature did X" because for 99.99999999%+ of things I don't believe "nature" is responsible for it. What does that even mean?
>except maybe it makes you feel good about yourselfThe projection is off the charts
