neo-x wrote:IceMobster wrote:I would appreciate if atheists could point out what is wrong with this picture (if anything).
Even as a thiest I think this is pretty bad picture, filled with strawman arguments.
1. The common consensus would be that the matter always existed. So there would be no "nothing"
2. There is no such thing as an "ordered" universe, that is a loaded word. Theists who believe that are just putting stock in the wrong place. the more we know the more we understand that the universe is chaotic at best and worse mildly chaotic.
3. First signs of life came after first what happened was that chemical reactions happened.
4. False premise...no assistance needed if evolution happens.
5. Non-sequitur ... there is no book which says it has to be so. But this is still the wrong reason, even though it's technically correct. Pattern recognition is at the heart of all living things. in humans its much more enhanced and that has caused our brains to do more, process more but its a step by step procedure. Rationality is not a problem, even a bee can solve distance problems on its own scale. Conscience is not understood right now but there's research in that area incomplete but seems promising - e.g Crocs have big brains but their brains anatomy is different. the biggest portion of their brain is devoted to smell. Humans on the other hand have a lot of their brains working to process vision and perhaps conscience evolved because of a result of that, to distinguish between so much visual input and perhaps some other factors.
I think James Bishop attacked something he didn't understand.
More succinctly, it is dumb and not worth responding to.