Such elaborate and sophisticated preparation for a simple meal. Whoever designed this is a genius as well as the artist!

Nope just good old natural selection sorting out a problem over an incredible long period of time. No designer no artist. I just hope spiders don't fart

I have never been a fan of the idea that everything came from nothing and
it has all been luck that the world has progressed this far.
It is amusing to see how vehemently people deny something they say
does not exist, at least they hope so. Being judged sounds so
"Judgimental " and scary, doesn't it.

I kinda have to agree with ya #3. Idk about god or whatever, but everything seems to well designed to be solely spontaneous existence by mere chance and circumstance. I can't convince myself that what we know was not created by a higher life form. Its too sophisticated, plain and simple. I often wonder why the process of natural selection, evolution, cant simply be part of the grand design. Now if it was all made by an omnipotent being that's everlasting is a topic for another day, but surely some form of intelligence had a hand in it all.

For arguments sake, why cant God have created natural selection, or why can't natural selection have gave birth to God, who then decided to burst our universe into life? 13.5 billion years is a long time, the life of our universe, but what about beyond that? Or are we still naive enough to think the sun revolves around us? Existence only existed while our universe did? Doubtful.

Until one can disprove the other with 100% certainty, and provable facts to back it up, in every aspect of the debate, I prefer to keep an open mind to any and all possibilities. And I don't mean simply proving your own personal beliefs, I mean ALSO Disproving, unquestionably, the other beliefs. Till that's done from either end of the dispute, then that's all either end of the dispute is, beliefs. nothing more. Fact is, we simply don't have enough information to reach the absolute truth of it all, and to think we know the origins of everything is foolhardy.

The big bang was an event. Events require a catalyst. If there was a catalyst that triggered the big bang, then that clearly was not the beginning of all that is or will ever be. There was more that meets the minds eye already.

Disagree with me if you so choose, but I think an open mind is the key to true enlightenment, and so i like to practice being open minded accordingly, because I have a hunger for irrefutable facts and true knowledge.

The spider is brilliant. A well designed complete system - not sure how it could 'evolve' any more than a mousetrap can evolve...most successful piece of wood...grows a spring...grows a catch...grows a hammer.

Ice expands as it cools at 0-5C, so it floats : life would be impossible if it did what it was supposed to do and contract.

Square root of -1 : there are things that exist, that are impossible

Creation of life : I'm await creation of life in a lab. Primordial soup... apply electrodes...amino acids... proteins... dna... chromosomes... complicated system of a single cell animal... still waiting

Evolution : Animals cannot mutate into another species. No new mutation would be able to mate with un-mutated, hybrids are sterile. Still waiting for the missing links

Big bang : an accidental explosion from 'nothing' - because accidental explosions from nothing happen all the time.

I'm waiting for the AI version of Rome Total War where the characters achieve self awareness and twig there is a player, watching them...

#6 Good question. Who made the creator?

Perhaps, rules "outside" are other than "inside" our universe. We are created but perhaps, outside our reality, the idea of being created from nothing is absurd. Consider the square root of -1, it is, by our rules, impossible. And yet it exists, used all the time in maths. Hinting, perhaps to perpendicular dimension.

How do animals have pre-programmed instinct? How did aspirin get in trees and why? And now we are told the bulk of DNA does nothing. Call it "junk DNA", or call it "latent DNA", unlocked potential, almost as if an engineer had built a system with future upgrades in mind.

#6 You actually believe that a God, Creator, supernatural Being should be scientifically explainable by man's limited capabilities?
The power and thought processes required to have created our world would be beyond man's ability to comprehend,I believe.
Glad to see some comments here supporting at least "intelligent design" instead of, "They tell us that, we lost our tails, evolving up,
from little snails."

it amuses me how ppl downrate others opinions just because they differ from their own beliefs. Personally, I think a comment on this topic should always be uprated, despite the perspective shared or opposed to, as long as its well thought out, and not slanderous to other points of view. To downrate such comments is to discourage asking questions in pursuit of the real truth. It kinda goes against human nature to not desire a deeper understanding, to not be curious and to not ask questions. Blind faith will get you through the days, but it will get you no closer to an educated leap in our understanding of it all.

Back on the discussion train of thought though, I do agree that its kinda a scenario of "which came first, the chicken or the egg". I try to dismiss all that thinking though because it can become an infinite loop. To do this, i remind myself that I'm not asking what existed first, EVER, but more specifically, "what is the real origin story of life and the universe 'as we know it'" Its a smaller scale version of the same bigger question, yet imo easier to come to an understanding of, and therefore perhaps get us closer to answering the bigger question.

I love topics like this. It stimulates peoples minds, and increases our odds of one day reaching an actual answer. Its also interesting to see peoples reactions, be it an open minded one like my own, or one of pure conviction in either side of the coin, to the point that questioning that particular view... well, gets you downrated, lol.

Think! think! think! all of you. You make this much more complicated than you need to. It's really very simple if you open your minds. If there was a creator and if you believe this creator created us in it's image. Why would it have gone to the trouble of creating dinosaurs first and why is there undisputable evidence of an evolutional link from now all the way back to the dinosaurs, and indeed all the way back to single celled blobs of nearly nothing that eventually evolved into dinosaurs connecting us, apes, birds, fish, insects etc.

Why is there also undisputable evidence of a primitive human being with little or no language that evolved into modern man. Why because it is a fact.

If you accept any part of the above (and you are blinkered or deluded if you don't, or you have been blinded by your religion) Then you must ask the question why would your creator need any part of you including your soul to go to some other place? and who said that was the case? the creator? or a human being, when did it say this? to who? thousands of years ago? when mankind was extremely superstitious, uuummmmm! The planet is in a far worse state now than it was two thousand years ago, now would be a better time for some guidance surly.

Of course if there is some soul destination place then it is going to be full of the souls of cavemen, iron-age man, as well as modern man, every nationality and age and every person that as ever lived and died. First wives, second wives, mistresses oh what a mess. Of course you would also need to believe in a hell for those bad people's souls. If you read the rules of a number of religions you won't have to worry about overcrowding though because if you have lived a faultless life but not been privileged to have been sold the religion by anyone (maybe you lived in a dense forest) then your soul doesn't get in anyway, Oh no that hardly seems fair now does it?
Live long prosper and everyday like it is your last, one day you will be right

first off Judge Jake, you are kinda tying religion into it with the whole souls thing, and thats more of a religion vs atheism type thing than a creationism vs evolutionism situation. Belief in a creator does not mean that which any religion depicts. Simply one beyond ourselves, capable of more than our wildest dreams can conceive.

Secondly, sure, there were dinosaurs, and primitive man. What of it? That really does nothing to disprove that a creator could have created those, in whatever order they (yes, they, not necessarily one entity) saw fit. To argue evolutionism and natural selection properly, you need to be able to explain all the details, and in my opinion, a major one is missing. The Big Bang.. What caused it? Where did all that matter that was condensed into an infinitesimally small singularity before it exploded, and released enough content to give existence to everything in our universe, come from? Why did it spontaneously happen? Why did it condense to that point to begin with? Accepting that belief system without answering those very important questions is as blind as simply saying "i believe in a creator because a book and other people told me to"

I do believe in a creator, but not for any religious reasons. I believe in it because the concepts of natural selection, evolutionism, is far too complex to just be a string of randomly occurring things from some theorized primordial soup. When I witness life begin from any combination of non living elements, then I will be more onboard that perhaps everything is purely circumstance without any sentient intervention. Until then, I can't escape the feeling that that can't be all there is to the story.

And since I rather enjoyed the last sentence of your post, I'll share another one I'm kind of fond of.. Its a pessimists point of view in a nutshell:
Expect the worst in every situation and all your surprises will be good ones

The most interesting about this discussion so far is the average length of the comments, and none about the subject at hand. Interesting little tactic for a quiet meal (away from predators?). Not easy to judge the scale but since this bubble is held intact by surface tension probably very small. Nothing here to inspire an evolution vs. design discussion; Richard Dawkins would have a field day. Now explain the bombardier beetle! And look up logical fallacies while you're at it so you won't mistake absence of an explanation for proof of the opposite.

lol #12. Its true, not much talk going on about the actual video, which was fascinating.. But who said anything about the absence of an explanation being proof of the opposite? Personally, i don't think either side can be dis-proven as it currently stands, which is why I prefer to question it all vs simply accept it. Granted, I have my own beliefs, but I also acknowledge that I may be incorrect. Thats why its such a fun discussion, bc ultimately, nobody really knows.

Bk to the video content tho.. Idk about it being safe from predators. Surely some fish would see that as a nice meal. It does make me think twice about swimming anywhere except pools now though, lol

#12 The same Richard Dawkins whose other great idea is that "mild"
pedophilia is ok and never harmed him when he was exposed to it as
a boy by his adult male school teacher? Yea,great guy.....

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/world/atheist-writer-richard-dawkins-child-sex-abuse-scandals-over-hyped-article-1.1452198

so which one came first the chicken or the egg

#15 The duck

Oooh! #16, soo close, it was clearly the platypus, lol