If you remove the bars you still lessen your security, no matter how safe you think the neighborhood may be, and you’re still going against the architect’s design despite your subjective opinion on the beauty (or lack thereof) of the bars. In fact Mosquitos are one of the world’s most dangerous animals to this day and those would be the bugs that hair blocks, we still “need” our bars, by your own logic.
So yes, god (at least with a small “g” unless you specify Allah, Yaweah, Jehovah, Xenu, JHVH-1, El, Prometheus, Ra, Quetzalcoatl, Khnum, etc). Your theory only holds up as “true” (and tenuously at that, if ) if your god is real. Pascals wager is fun and all but until such time as you can prove the existence of such a creator, your conclusions are unprovable.
After further thought, I think my blemish hypothesis is correct…The reason could be
You don’t even believe your own rationalizations and refuse to let your conscious mind see it. You would have said “is.”
The designer created humans with artistic ability.
But not the ability to distinguish art from sickness?
Fun fact, my god told me tattoos are hot and body hair is natural, and my god is bigger than your god, so therefore you’re wrong.
An architect could design a house to be more attractive without security bars but in some areas bars are necessary. Mosquitos are not a big problem in many areas. An area could be sprayed with insecticide if they become a problem. Women also now have the time and equipment to shave their legs and armpits.
Evidence for a creator is off topic.
It is simpler to design men to innately find plain skin on women attractive.
Yeah, now they can shave, but for most of human history that wasn’t the case (unless you think we’re 2000 yr old and Adam and Eve is literal not apocryphal, the human race is much older than recorded history, which is much older than 2000yr, unless you’re one of those “The Devil put dinosaur bones there to fool us” types). If what you say is true we never would have gotten to even develop fire before we died because nobody was shaving so nobody wanted to fuck.
Evidence for a creator is not off topic, it’s the entire crux of your argument. Your argument is literally “god told me to.” If god is then not real and instead all of science is correct with the theory of evolution, then your entire argument is also not real. That’s kinda the problem with hanging your insane theories on an unprovable creator, technically you can never be “disproven” as you can keep saying “god told me” while ignoring anything inconvenient as you do, but anyone who isn’t dumb enough to already fall for that won’t ever be convinced.
But this is already settled, I told you I talked to my god and he said yours is a liar. I will accept no further debate on this topic because my god is infallible and you can’t prove otherwise.
Intelligent design simply believes that the universe and life was created by an intelligent agency. There are no religious texts. When women didn’t have the equipment or time to shave, they didn’t. Removing body hair enhances a women’s sexuality but is not required for eroticism no more than makeup or perfume.
The topic is whether men find tattoos on women attractive not evidence for intelligent design.
If your argument hinges on “intelligent design is real and The Creator™ made men hate tattoos” you need to prove the first part before the second can be “true.” If intelligent design is not real then no creator made men hate tattoos, simple as.
Incorrect. I presented a survey which said that most men find tattoos on women attractive if they are small and in hidden locations. There is no requirement to give a reason. The article didn’t give a reason.
No, you are the one ascribing the reason without any evidence to support it, of course the article doesn’t back up your delusions, but that is the point, the article does not back up your delusions.
If you remove the bars you still lessen your security, no matter how safe you think the neighborhood may be, and you’re still going against the architect’s design despite your subjective opinion on the beauty (or lack thereof) of the bars. In fact Mosquitos are one of the world’s most dangerous animals to this day and those would be the bugs that hair blocks, we still “need” our bars, by your own logic.
So yes, god (at least with a small “g” unless you specify Allah, Yaweah, Jehovah, Xenu, JHVH-1, El, Prometheus, Ra, Quetzalcoatl, Khnum, etc). Your theory only holds up as “true” (and tenuously at that, if ) if your god is real. Pascals wager is fun and all but until such time as you can prove the existence of such a creator, your conclusions are unprovable.
You don’t even believe your own rationalizations and refuse to let your conscious mind see it. You would have said “is.”
But not the ability to distinguish art from sickness?
Fun fact, my god told me tattoos are hot and body hair is natural, and my god is bigger than your god, so therefore you’re wrong.
An architect could design a house to be more attractive without security bars but in some areas bars are necessary. Mosquitos are not a big problem in many areas. An area could be sprayed with insecticide if they become a problem. Women also now have the time and equipment to shave their legs and armpits.
Evidence for a creator is off topic.
It is simpler to design men to innately find plain skin on women attractive.
Yeah, now they can shave, but for most of human history that wasn’t the case (unless you think we’re 2000 yr old and Adam and Eve is literal not apocryphal, the human race is much older than recorded history, which is much older than 2000yr, unless you’re one of those “The Devil put dinosaur bones there to fool us” types). If what you say is true we never would have gotten to even develop fire before we died because nobody was shaving so nobody wanted to fuck.
Evidence for a creator is not off topic, it’s the entire crux of your argument. Your argument is literally “god told me to.” If god is then not real and instead all of science is correct with the theory of evolution, then your entire argument is also not real. That’s kinda the problem with hanging your insane theories on an unprovable creator, technically you can never be “disproven” as you can keep saying “god told me” while ignoring anything inconvenient as you do, but anyone who isn’t dumb enough to already fall for that won’t ever be convinced.
But this is already settled, I told you I talked to my god and he said yours is a liar. I will accept no further debate on this topic because my god is infallible and you can’t prove otherwise.
Intelligent design simply believes that the universe and life was created by an intelligent agency. There are no religious texts. When women didn’t have the equipment or time to shave, they didn’t. Removing body hair enhances a women’s sexuality but is not required for eroticism no more than makeup or perfume.
The topic is whether men find tattoos on women attractive not evidence for intelligent design.
If your argument hinges on “intelligent design is real and The Creator™ made men hate tattoos” you need to prove the first part before the second can be “true.” If intelligent design is not real then no creator made men hate tattoos, simple as.
Incorrect. I presented a survey which said that most men find tattoos on women attractive if they are small and in hidden locations. There is no requirement to give a reason. The article didn’t give a reason.
No, you are the one ascribing the reason without any evidence to support it, of course the article doesn’t back up your delusions, but that is the point, the article does not back up your delusions.