DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Anomalocaris]

How do you infer design based on specificity and complexity?  Aren't general and simple things also designed? You told us that DNA and rocks are both designed.

The complexity and specificity allow us to infer design.  When I look at a car or a building, I infer design based on it's specified complexity.  Don't twist my worst like child's play antagonistic debating.  I said the entire universe is designed which is why even a dumb rock requires design here; however, the proof of design is in the complex and specific examples like DNA.

Such quibble as you have tiresomely repeated have been dismissed with the utmost finality. Bring something fundamentally new or shut the fuck up.

[Abaddon_ire]

How do you infer design based on specificity and complexity?  Aren't general and simple things also designed? You told us that DNA and rocks are both designed.

The complexity and specificity allow us to infer design.  When I look at a car or a building, I infer design based on it's specified complexity.  Don't twist my worst like child's play antagonistic debating.  I said the entire universe is designed which is why even a dumb rock requires design here; however, the proof of design is in the complex and specific examples like DNA.

The entire universe hates you and wants to make you dead. What makes you think it was designed for you?

[CDF47]

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same. You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from. Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

[Abaddon_ire]

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same.  You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

Wrong. Basic chemistry is clearly beyond your knowledge. Various of us have tried to point this out but you don't care, preferring to wallow in your ignorance. It is the very same kind of chemistry that allows you to post here. That is how your device fundamentally works. You know this because you are not on here proclaiming how marvellous it is that your gawd invented the transistor and it is able to store information isn't that miraculous???? Course not, because at some level, you realise that information could be encoded in anything. Were one sufficiently bored, one could encode information in the curvature of human penises. Or rocks. Your device has information encoded in rocks. It's called silicon. Sand in common speech.

All that said, you have yet to explain why it is that the universe that your gawd created just for you wants to kill you.

---

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same.  You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

So when are you moving to the balmy shores on Saturn. Your gawd created it just for you. It must be a pleasant place, right? No? How about Mars. That must be just right since your gawd created it just for you. How about Venus? I hear there are lots of hot chicks there (women being slaves that gawd created for your pleasure/slavery/beating).

[pocaracas]

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same.  You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

Tell me... what does it matter to you?

If a god somehow willed all this into creation or not, what difference does it make if we believe it to be so or not?
Clearly, that god is not bothering to come forward and actually tell us unequivocally that he's responsible for this all, so I guess he's not interested in having us properly aware of that fact.
If that god doesn't want us to acknowledge his act of creation, why do you (and others like you) come here and work against god's will?
Why do you bring it upon yourself to do the work of god?
Why do you think god requires you to speak for him?

A bit presumptuous, if you ask me...

[Pat Mustard]

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same.  You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

The only person dancing is you.

You're stillbtrying to argue that CSI is something other than "I believe that x can only be made by god therefore it is proven that god made it".

[Amarok]

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same.  You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

The only person who dancing is you . All your arguments have been refuted or rendered irrelevant. Your a pusher of pseudoscience and little else.

---

T

he complexity and specificity allow us to infer design.  When I look at a car or a building, I infer design based on it's specified complexity.  Don't twist my worst like child's play antagonistic debating.  I said the entire universe is designed which is why even a dumb rock requires design here; however, the proof of design is in the complex and specific examples like DNA.

Mindlessly repeating the long refuted design inference(which isn't a real thing it's pseudoscience) will get you no were . Oh and again argument from ignorance.

---

OMG now he's even copy pasting examples of "design" from ID websites . The mount Rushmore example has already been refuted 

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/dow...1&type=pdf

http://infophilia.blogspot.ca/2007/04/if...u-sue.html

https://ncse.com/library-resource/michae...blic-radio

---

I'm convinced this guys a parrot . Hell wasn't even able to see Richard Carriers utter devastation of the Central themes of ID because he didn't find the word DNA in a random search 
Seriously

[brewer]

You guys can try to dance around the argument all you want but the questions remain the same.  You can't even begin to explain where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  Everything you come up with is a joke and not scientific.

That makes no difference. We don't need to invent man made make believe creature just because it's not explained to your/our satisfaction (yet). That's the fall back position of your ilk.

[Amarok]

Specified and complex highly sophisticated digital code is in DNA.  It is designed.  If I saw Mount Rushmore I would know it too was designed.  We infer designed based on both specificity and complexity.

Bet somebody had Mt Rushmore on their bingo card. It is inevitable that your type will trot it out as some sort of killer argument. What next? 747 in a junkyard?

Oh yes Hoyles fallacy .Their still trying to push that one .

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hoyle's_fallacy

http://www.skepticblog.org/2012/05/09/th...-argument/

---

Now expect a great deal of blather about the ID fake information categories . That no one outside the ID has read credience for .

---

Some more ass kicking 

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Intelligen...n#Evidence

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Complex_Sp...nformation

https://fr-s-schneider.ncifcrf.gov/paper...exity.html

[pocaracas]

Oh yes Hoyles fallacy .Their still trying to push that one .

Dude...
They're === they are
Their == belongs to them
there == that place


Some others that have been irking me
no == negative
know == have information


I == me, myself
i == a letter, means nothing on its own. You have no problem capitalizing letters at the start of a sentence... why this?

Thou == ??
Though == however

I know you're a non-native... I'm a non-native myself... I sometimes find myself wondering what is meant by some weird spelling of a word... especially when the bad spelling is also a valid word.
So please can you write things a bit better so we can all understand you better?
You're practically the only one consistently guilty of such atrocious spelling (now that Drich is mostly absent or out of the threads I go to)...


Carry on.