(May 4, 2018 at 3:28 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 3:22 am)ignoramus Wrote: This person is certainly onto something here!
I personally believe that God created birds fully formed
And don't get me started on the eye! That's a no brainer for God... How can anyone argue against concrete evidence like that!

Yep, that's right folks. Zeus created all these things!

You had me right up until the point where you totally ignored the fundamental truth that Brahma created everything.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 2:48 am)CDF47 Wrote: DNA has a property that cannot be explained by natural processes.  Locked securely inside the double helix structure of DNA is a wealth of information in the form of precisely sequenced chemicals that scientists represent with the letters A, C, T, and G.  In a written language information is communicated by a precise arrangement of letters.  In the same way, the instruction necessary to assemble amino acids into proteins are conveyed by the sequences of chemicals arranged along the spine of the DNA.  This chemical code has been called the “Language of Life” and it is the most densely packed and elaborately detailed assembly of information in the known universe.

Steps to conflation:

1)  Define "information" in a way that covers physical/chemical relationships
2)  Say that there's therefore a designer, even though the re-definition in (1) doesn't require one
3)  Ignore the fact that two different definitions have been used or implied

1)  Define any systematic encoding of information as a "language."
2)  Since we all know that languages are communication tools, and only sentient beings can communicate with each other, insist that all encoding of information implies sentient beings.
3)  Ignore the fact that two different definitions have been used or implied

Let me add another one.
1)  Beautiful things are art
2)  Sunsets are beautiful
3)  Therefore, an artist must have created sunsets.  Must be God.

Or this:
1)  Chains are a series of interlocking metal rings
2)  Proteins form into chains
3)  Therefore, proteins are made of metal.

Oh, wait. . . that last one seems flawed somehow.

---

Adding billions of years to something does not all of a sudden make it possible. A complex code does not just come into existence from nothing.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 3:55 am)Little lunch Wrote: I can't wait to dissect the creator to prove that he was also created by another creator.

God always has been and always will be, just like our true selves. We are what is.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 4:36 am)robvalue Wrote: You said it yourself, we label parts of the DNA with letters. That produces information, for us to try and understand how it works.

I think scientists have a pretty good idea about the origins of DNA, but even if they didn't, that doesn't imply a designer. We would just be lacking an explanation. That's not an invitation to invent explanations.

If someone did design life, they did a horrendous job.

Also, who cares if we are designed anyway? What difference does it make?

I think the designer did a fantastic job designing life. What are your specific problems with it? Are you attracted to other humans or would you rather them look some other way?

---

(May 4, 2018 at 4:37 am)vulcanlogician Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 3:56 am)ignoramus Wrote: The unique crystaline structure of a simple snowflake is so geometrically perfect, that it obviously has to be man made!

Ignoramus has a point OP. Just because something is complex and intricate does not necessarily mean it has a creator.

Be careful posting links. We have a 30/30 rule which means no links until you've been here 30 days, made 30 posts. BUT, your links were put there to support your argument so they might not get snipped. Just for future reference. Here's da rules btw. All pretty standard stuff, really. https://atheistforums.org/rules.php

What specifically convinces you that complex things can just come to life or come into existence from nothing with no intelligence? And don't say billions of years of evolution because that is a cop-out and a straw man argument.

Everena:
God always has been and always will be


Which one? Zeus? Juipter? Odin? Hanuman? Ra? Or any of the thousands of others that have been abandoned over the centuries?

(May 4, 2018 at 5:43 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 5:29 am)pocaracas Wrote: What if I were to tell you that yes it can be explained by natural processes?


How about if, instead of information, I tell you that it's a prototype for a life form?
A prototype that, in the right environment, can lead to that life form.

The actual origin of DNA is, of course, lost in the mists of time, so one can only speculate about it... you included.
Your argument from incredulity (which actually boils down to an argument from ignorance) has no merit whatsoever.
What is known is that DNA is composed of biochemical molecules. It is known that they obey deterministic chemistry, which obeys physics... quantum physics and all that. This deterministic behavior of our world makes it unlikely that any molecule is the product of any design.

I know it's easy to conflate the complexity of a highly evolved mechanism with design of said mechanism, but, if you are really 47 years old (or older, born in 1947?) then you should have enough mental maturity to understand that such conflation is possible and realize that your position is, at least, not certain.... and, at most, false.

You are missing the part about the information and how it operates.  See the videos in my signature.  This is obviously designed.  The ribosome alone acts like a manufacturing plant assembling complex proteins from amino acids based on the information in the DNA.  Just amazing.

I am not 47 or born in 47.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 5:37 am)Mathilda Wrote: Ah yes the old micro-evolution bullshit. You cannot make the distinction between micro-evolution and macro-evolution.

All evolution works by taking small steps (i.e. micro-evolution). But the small steps accumulate over time. No theist who admits that micro-evolution takes place ever comes up with a suggestion as to why small steps can't accumulate over time to make big changes.

I don't believe there is evidence for a change of kinds or in macro-evolution.

They don't like to talk about macroevolution because the evidence for it is flimsy at best. The only thing that has been proven beyond any doubt is adaption.

(November 10, 2018 at 4:41 pm)Everena Wrote: They don't like to talk about macroevolution because the evidence for it is flimsy at best. The only thing that has been proven beyond any doubt is adaption.

Evidence for God, please.

Snow flakes, haven't you been following, vulcan?

(November 10, 2018 at 4:49 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:

(November 10, 2018 at 4:41 pm)Everena Wrote: They don't like to talk about macroevolution because the evidence for it is flimsy at best. The only thing that has been proven beyond any doubt is adaption.

Evidence for God, please.

It is always interesting how they love to bypass the absolute need to first prove god's existence, as though the claim based on fallible personal faith is in any way of substantial credibility toward their apologetic arguments.