DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Amarok]

Oh we could and have given countless examples in nature to debunk this pretension and the fallacious reasoning behind it . But we all know were this is going to go .

But some food for thought 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamin...-response/

https://www.skepticink.com/smilodonsretr...-computer/


https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Information_theory

[CDF47]

Can anyone answer where the information bearing properties of DNA come from?

[ignoramus]

Matey, if you really wanted to know stuff, you'd just look it up on a real science doco on youtube... But you don't. And you haven't.
Even if we give you the technical answers, it won't change a thing. It wasn't logic or science or proof that got you hooked on skydaddy.

I won't waste any more of your time.

[robvalue]

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?

[vulcanlogician]

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

[CDF47]

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?

The best idea scientists have about DNA is that it was created by a Creator. The information in DNA is extremely complex and specific which encodes the eventual instruction of highly sophisticated nano molecular machines and other proteins.

From there I have to jump to theology if I may on this site. The intent of this world is not perfection after the fall of man according to Scripture. If the Bible is true, which I believe it is, it would make eternal consequences.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Computer codes always come from programmers. 

It is possible to evolve computer code. In fact genetic algorithms are one way for sure that we know that the evolutionary process works. With it I can easily create systems that you would call irreducibly complex.

I myself never actually know how my AI works after I evolve it. I have a vague idea of the principles but it would take me about three months to analyse it and figure it out what is actually happening. All I do is choose what mechanisms the evolutionary process can play with.

If I had to design my AI and could not evolve it, the task would be orders of magnitude harder.

[Amarok]

The best idea scientists have about DNA is that it was created by a Creator.

Rubbish 

The only "scientists " who propose such rubbish are ID shills

[I_am_not_mafia]

The best idea scientists have about DNA is that it was created by a Creator.  

Maybe you should actually speak to some scientists rather than parrot what you have been told by religious non-scientists.

[CDF47]

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

Thanks for the rules information.  I did not know that and I am not here to break any of the rules.

DNA is not just complex.  It is highly sophisticated.  It is both extremely complex and precisely specific.  There is no such thing as junk DNA anymore.  It turns out that what was called junk DNA actually acts like a computer operating system.  At least 85 percent of DNA performs these functions and 3 percent perform coding based on the latest figures I heard.  It is now called non-coding DNA.  I would post a link but I am not allowed but there is plenty of information about it on the Internet.