DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[I_am_not_mafia]

Got any evidence?

Yes, computer codes always come from a programmer, for instance.

I've already pointed out to you that it doesn't have to be the case. It is possible to evolve computer programs.

[CDF47]

Believe in Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior and be saved.

Goodness, saved from what?  Should I lock my doors...clutch my pearls and my guns?  Am I under some kind of threat?  By whom?

In my religious belief, if you believe in the Son of God you will be saved and have everlasting life in paradise.

[The Grand Nudger]

Saved from what, or whom, lol?

Besides...

[Mister Agenda]

Actually 51 percent of scientists believe in God or a higher power and 41 percent don't believe in either and 7 percent don't know or refused to answer based on a Pew Research Poll.  I would post the link but I am not yet allowed to.

Dr. Meyer focused on digital information processing as part of his undergrad work and he focused on biology and life's origins as part of his grad work at Cambridge.

51% of scientist in the USA, the most religious developed country. And 51% believing in God or a higher power does not imply that 51% think the origin of DNA is intelligent design. And the opinion of scientists on the topic of the origin of DNA who aren't in a field of biology carries no weight, and is an appeal to inappropriate authority.

In the Academy of Science (the 'best scientists'), it's more like 10% who believe in God or a higher power, btw.

[CDF47]

Thank you very much for the welcome.  I am glad to be here.  The problem with that argument is, DNA contains extremely complex and specified information (A, C, T, and G) in a four digit digital code which encodes amino acids to be sequentially placed to create complex proteins which perform different functions in a cell.  There are also molecular machines in the cell which are highly specified complex and functional.  I could go on all day about this but I will leave it at that for now.  It is truly amazing.  See the videos below for more information:

Interacting chemicals are not digital codes.

Genetic information is a digital code.

---

Non-functional information is Shannon Information.  Functional information, like is stored in DNA, is complex and specific.

Do both require a mind/designer, or not?

Yes, this entire universe was designed but there are differences in random formations and highly complex and specific codes and machines.

[Edwardo Piet]

Got any evidence?

Yes, computer codes always come from a programmer, for instance.

That's just the extremely outdated watchmaker argument LOL

The programmer itself evolved. Fail.

---

How could nothing create everything?

It can't. What has that got to do with anything?

[The Grand Nudger]

Yes, this entire universe was designed but there are differences in random formations and highly complex and specific codes and machines.

Then your "that's shannon information" rejoinder is pointless and incoherent. The difference between two types of info is not any requirement of a god/mind/designer for the one and not the other. So stop?

Tree ring info requires a god..barcodes on rocks require gods...random and unspecific and non-functional this that's and the other require gods..

[Edwardo Piet]

Goodness, saved from what?  Should I lock my doors...clutch my pearls and my guns?  Am I under some kind of threat?  By whom?

In my religious belief, if you believe in the Son of God you will be saved and have everlasting life in paradise.

That's nice. When I was a kid I had an imaginary friend called Pooey who was exactly like me except invisible and made of poo. That's no more or less relevant.

The difference was... I was just having fun. I knew it was a load of shit *ba-dum-tiss*.

[CDF47]

A mind that transcends this universe created it.  The proof is in the creation[...]

You've already contradicted yourself right there. If this mind transcends the universe then we cannot have evidence of it and the proof can't be within its natural creation but must instead be outside of it where we literally can't possibly detect it.

Whenever the natural world can't be explained naturally that just means we don't know the explanation yet. Postulating the existence of something outside of our experience explains absolutely nothing. It just leaves us with even more to explain.

And you're begging the question by referring to the natural world as "the creation" as you're already assuming it was created before you've even provided an argument that it was.

Evidence is beyond your reach because you're talking about something non-empirical.

As a theist all you've got left is arguments... and so far it's just been thousands of years of logical failures and fallacies on the theist's part.

I believe the transcendent intelligence interacts with the creation.

[Edwardo Piet]

I believe the transcendent intelligence interacts with the creation.

Well you clearly have to have faith there.