It's utterly absurd but they simply flatly deny this obvious statement. Such obvious products of intelligence are certainly proof of a Creator, it's insane of them to try to make them the products of insensate nature, yet they go on and on and on demanding that evidence be SHOWN FOR this claim that "law, order, identifiable purpose and design are proof of a Creator." Totally schizophrenogenic. Insanity reigns so pervasively there is no getting through to them.
Here's the dialogue:
DB has given EVIDENCE of a supernatural cause, he has not merely suggested it. The devotees of the natural explanation can only counter that natural causes may be argued to explain such phenomena, but they can't claim to have the superior argument, nor better evidence either for the natural explanation, since on the face of it intelligence is absolutely the necessary explanation for law, order and purpose.[DB] law, order, identifiable purpose and design are proof of a creator.[Taq] Evidence please.[DB] Of course both positions are equal in evidence,. . .[Taq] No, they are not. You have yet to support the argument that law, order, and identifiable purpose are signs of creator and a creator alone with evidence.[DB] Please demonstrate how nature or natural causes is anything more than a display of nature?[Taq] Natural causes are just that, natural causes. You are suggesting supernatural causes, and are doing so without any observations of supernatural causation, nor evidence of it.
please demonstrate how natural causes is an explanation of soley natural causes
[DB] Law, order and purpose are more that sufficient and on the same equalitywith nature causes (as you use the term) to provide evidence of a designer[Taq] Why? How are law, order, and purpose evidence of a designer? It would seem to me that law, order, and purpose are evidence of law, order and purpose in the same way that natural causes are evidence of natural causes.
It just goes on and on like that for pages, with DB insisting he's provided the evidence asked for, which he has, and all the rest of them denying it. Here's one from Percy many pages later:
See how creationist evidence, genuine evidence, is simply done away with at EvC? With of course a little added ridicule thrown in. If it is agreed that "law, order, purpose and design" are evident in phenomena, that IS the evidence asked for. Yes, it can be alternatively interpreted by the materialist camp, not very well of course and that is the best they can do. In itself it IS evidence for an intelligence as the cause of such phenomena. Eventually the admins will be fed up with the discussion, and who will they blame? The creationists of course.[DB] Since I have now provided what you requested it is your obligation as an debater to respond to that rebuttal[Percy] You provided evidence of the creator and of how he influenced evolution? Really? Where? Oh, and did God turn out to be Christian, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist or other?
I think you're providing wonderful examples of a couple of the creationist approaches to debate: making claims that you've proved things you've never proved, and misunderstanding how evidence works.
Truly there is something wrong with the mind that is shaped by materialist Science, something utterly perverted that prevents it from recognizing the difference between properties of Mind and properties of Matter.