>>96974600>points out a fallacy>commits the fallacy fallacyI'm noticing. Are you?
I know who I am arguing with this time, but I will answer you anyway, despite you not wanting to learn or understand my position(as seen in our previous interactions). You might try and say the same about me, but the contexts are different since I was always on the defence, with you being the first to initiate things; hence, our positions were not equal.
Firstly(0), I am not arguing for the existence of the Christian God, and neither was the man in the video, but simply of God as an explanation for why everything exists. The only reason you'd think he was arguing specifically for the necessity of the Christian God is if you have an agenda(likely given your past replies and focuses) or assumed so because of the end rather than the content of his argumentation.
Secondly(1), design does not rule out evolution. Evolution can be true and it can be driven in a specific direction by God; you don't need to pick one or the other. However, that's assuming that evolution as our newest "answer" to how everything is how it is now is correct, despite all the evidence against it and the lack of evidence supporting it. This specific argument is a response to some evolutionists suggesting that perhaps the right key components to life were present, only happening to fall into place perfectly so that it brought forth life; it was both a criticism and an analogy to showcase how ridiculous that theory is. Then when we rule out the idea that "everything just fell into place on its own" we can bring up design by intent— we observe that all components of our body have a purpose and the same goes for all other life forms, be it macro or micro organisms. On top of all of this, natural selection and evolution via mutations do not explain the trend of things becoming more complex, if evolution were truly random and mutations were genetic mistakes then we'd expect things to get more chaotical, yet we observe the opposite. All this at the very least suggests that evolution is not random and is instead heading towards a certain goal.
Next(2), in the context of the Christian God, we believe that we live in a fallen world, meaning that because of death entering the world through the fall of mankind the world became imperfect and chaotical in comparison to the way things initially were in God's design. Things such as male nipples are not necessarily explained by evolution but by simple gene theory. Speaking of, if you believe in evolution, are we not simply still in the process of it? And if it is possible(which I showed above) for evolution to be heading in a certain direction with intention, then why would you complain about having seemingly useless features that might prove useful in the future? You're doing exactly what you brought up about the past, you think the sun is fire because of your observations, yet it very well could be the case that we just don't know yet; other vestigial organs such as the appendix were at first thought to be useless(sun being fire), only to now be known to support gut health and immune system function(nuclear fusion).
As for your 3rd point, God is not physical, He has no apparent complexity to suggest a designer; God is also outside of time, meaning that nothing can come before Him, making God the necessary original Cause— The Uncaused Cause of everything.
Lastly(4), complexity IS objective, complexity requires intricacy, and we can tell apart randomness and chaos from design and order. As for the Giant’s Causeway: not being man-made doesn't mean it's not designed; especially when discussing God as the ultimate designer, as the one who set in stone the conditions and patterns of the universe.
Hope this helps! Don't reply mindlessly and don't dare focus on one specific point or just don't reply at all.
I think I addressed everything, maybe something slipped past though.
