DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Abaddon_ire]

Thanks man ...keep up the good work ... Don't let the buggers disway you! Ever! I think you may be onto something!

No, they can try their childish ridicule and trickery but it can't beat the truth of design.

You have no truth. You believe in a magical sky fairy who appears in the superstitions of bronze age goat-herders.  According to those fairy tales, the sky fairy is not omnipotent, not omniscient, not omnipresent, but is an evil thug full of malevolence, capriciousness and all manner of vileness. Yet you somehow find that bastard worthy of worship. According to you, the evil bastard gifted you both free will and intelligence and promptly commanded you NOT TO USE THEM.

You are almost a poster boy for everything that is wrong with religion.

[CDF47]

There seems to be a design fault with this one. It repeats the same debunked nonsense and then declares victory over and over. Does anyone have a customer service number?

LOL

---

Please, you all lost this argument on page 1. 

Meaning: I've ran out of answers but don't want to admit defeat so keep repeating myself. Please stop asking questions I can't answer and tell me I've won.

I've answered a ton of questions.  The questions I asked were never adequately answered.

---

No, they can try their childish ridicule and trickery but it can't beat the truth of design.

You have no truth. You believe in a magical sky fairy who appears in the superstitions of bronze age goat-herders.  According to those fairy tales, the sky fairy is not omnipotent, not omniscient, not omnipresent, but is an evil thug full of malevolence, capriciousness and all manner of vileness. Yet you somehow find that bastard worthy of worship. According to you, the evil bastard gifted you both free will and intelligence and promptly commanded you NOT TO USE THEM.

You are almost a poster boy for everything that is wrong with religion.

Declares to be an atheist and not to like God either.  OK...

[Abaddon_ire]

You have no truth. You believe in a magical sky fairy who appears in the superstitions of bronze age goat-herders.  According to those fairy tales, the sky fairy is not omnipotent, not omniscient, not omnipresent, but is an evil thug full of malevolence, capriciousness and all manner of vileness. Yet you somehow find that bastard worthy of worship. According to you, the evil bastard gifted you both free will and intelligence and promptly commanded you NOT TO USE THEM.

You are almost a poster boy for everything that is wrong with religion.

Declares to be an atheist and not to like God either.  OK...

I am an atheist. I believe in no god or gods. The simple fact remains that as described in your holey babble, your god is a nasty piece of work.

And you like it.

[CDF47]

Declares to be an atheist and not to like God either.  OK...

I am an atheist. I believe in no god or gods. The simple fact remains that as described in your holey babble, your god is a nasty piece of work.

And you like it.

No, He's not.  He is just, merciful, trustworthy, and loving.  He has a wrath though and He punishes sin.

[pocaracas]

So you're saying that your creator god is an incompetent one that couldn't create everything just right, huh?
Interesting...
Or are you a Young Earth Creationist? Where that god created things as they are nowadays?

Do to the fall, things are not perfect.  That is pretty clear in Scripture.

You'll understand if we don't accept scripture as representative of anything that actually happened... for the most part, at least.

I am an Old Earth Creationist and believe in the Day-Age Interpretation of Genesis.

Hmm... you're a new kind I haven't yet encountered...
Explain to me how that works.
Do you accept the 4.3 billion year Earth, but it was created in 6 days, with humans and all animals already in it, pretty much as we see it today?

So at that point does it stop changing or adapting any more ? and micro changes no longer take place.
Also what exactly is a 'kind' ?

I presume microevolution can continue within the kind. Kind is a species.

If kind is a species, then how do you account for the fossil record?
Absence of humans in rock layers older than 2 million years?
Absence of dinosaurs in layers younger than 65 million years and older than 250 million years?
Absence of birds prior to dinosaurs?
Absence of land animals prior to water animals?
Absence of humans prior to apes?
And many other pieces of the puzzle of life on Earth that fit neatly under the model of evolution?


Also, what if I show you how evolution in the lab has resulted in a new species?

[CDF47]

Do to the fall, things are not perfect.  That is pretty clear in Scripture.

You'll understand if we don't accept scripture as representative of anything that actually happened... for the most part, at least.

I am an Old Earth Creationist and believe in the Day-Age Interpretation of Genesis.

Hmm... you're a new kind I haven't yet encountered...
Explain to me how that works.
Do you accept the 4.3 billion year Earth, but it was created in 6 days, with humans and all animals already in it, pretty much as we see it today?

I presume microevolution can continue within the kind.  Kind is a species.

If kind is a species, then how do you account for the fossil record?
Absence of humans in rock layers older than 2 million years?
Absence of dinosaurs in layers younger than 65 million years and older than 250 million years?
Absence of birds prior to dinosaurs?
Absence of land animals prior to water animals?
Absence of humans prior to apes?
And many other pieces of the puzzle of life on Earth that fit neatly under the model of evolution?


Also, what if I show you how evolution in the lab has resulted in a new species?

Yes, I believe the earth is 4.54 billion years old.  I believe each day that went by for God outside this universe, eons were going by inside of the universe.  Below is a chart of the Day-Age Interpretation of Genesis which I believe in:

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/day-age.html

There are no intermediary species though.  Sure water animals came before land animals,..., but that doesn't mean everyone had a common ancestor.  I believe all men and all women had a common ancestor in the first male and female on earth.  Science now shows DNA dates back to a single man and a single woman.  

Sure, I will look at the lab results.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Sure, I will look at the lab results.

<imagines a young scientifically illiterate teenage boy in his bedroom glossing over blog posts that he doesn't understand>

The fact that you even refer to 'lab results'. I mean, that's what people say when they send off your stool samples to be analysed. This is not the same as performing scientific experiments and writing up the results as a paper.

[downbeatplumb]

Not a strawman because it is exactly what you are doing. Don't know how DNA evolved? God-did-it.

Don't understand the big bang? God-did-it.

As for the bible, you raised that poorly written fiction in the first place. You claimed to believe in the christian god of the bible.

What you did is a classic straw man argument and you know it. I didn't say we don't know how DNA evolved God did it.  I said it is extremely sophisticated and highly complex and specific functional information which programs amino acid components to build functional molecular machines/proteins to operate in the cell is why it is designed.

I understand the Big Bang Theory and explained why everything came from nothing so a Creator must have created this fine-tuned universe.

I claimed to be a follower of the Christian religion because of the discussion I was having with one of the posters at the time.  Quit the spin, most people can see right through it.  Although I wouldn't expect much less from someone that uses the devil's name from the Book of Revelation.

Again with the unevidenced god did stuff baloney.

HOW did god do it?
Where did he get the stuff?
What was the process?
Where is your evidence for the process used?

In short you have zero evidence for your position but act as though its a slam dunk.

Science has a theory as to how DNA could have evolved, you have a Tabitha from bewitched wiggling her wickle nose.

You do also understand that fine tuning is not as good an argument as you think.

---

I am an atheist. I believe in no god or gods. The simple fact remains that as described in your holey babble, your god is a nasty piece of work.

And you like it.

No, He's not.  He is just, merciful, trustworthy, and loving.  He has a wrath though and He punishes sin.

Like Darth Vader he is an evil fictional character.

[Abaddon_ire]

I am an atheist. I believe in no god or gods. The simple fact remains that as described in your holey babble, your god is a nasty piece of work.

And you like it.

No, He's not.  He is just, merciful, trustworthy, and loving.  He has a wrath though and He punishes sin.

He endorses genocide, incest, slavery, human sacrifice and all manner of cruelty and injustice in your magic book.

Have you not read the vile tome?

[downbeatplumb]

There are no intermediary species though.  Sure water animals came before land animals,..., but that doesn't mean everyone had a common ancestor.  I believe all men and all women had a common ancestor in the first male and female on earth.  Science now shows DNA dates back to a single man and a single woman.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tr...al_fossils

https://www.livescience.com/38613-geneti...vered.html

These primeval people aren't parallel to the biblical Adam and Eve. They weren't the first modern humans on the planet, but instead just the two out of thousands of people alive at the time with unbroken male or female lineages that continue on today.

The rest of the human genome contains tiny snippets of DNA from many other ancestors — they just don't show up in mitochondrial or Y-chromosome DNA, Hammer said. (For instance, if an ancient woman had only sons, then her mitochondrial DNA would disappear, even though the son would pass on a quarter of her DNA via the rest of his genome.)