DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[robvalue]

I gotta applaud Khem for being really patient and giving this guy every possible chance to dig himself out of the hole of his own making.

It's a very strange argument we're being presented with:

"I can't imagine any way life couldn't be designed, therefor it is".

Even if we removed all of us from this scenario, if this guy's imagination somehow managed to improve, would that make it possible that life becomes retroactively not designed?

Like Khem says, he's fighting himself, and reality, at every point. I don't know if life is designed or not, nor do I care. But I know (with high confidence) that it isn't designed in the way he thinks it's designed.

(PS: DNA can't "show" life is designed when it's already being assumed that everything, including life, is already designed. It's a doubly broken argument.)

[Amarok]

I suspect there are some shills on this site.  

Only one and his name is CDF47

It's a one hundred year practice and it gives the appearance of knowing what you are talking about, intimidation and ridicule tactics, straw man tactics,....  

Yup those are tactics people like you have been using forever against honest intellectuals like us 

I am getting the sense that is at this site.

 Not until you came 

 There are probably one or a few shills that sway things that way or that have multiple usernames.

Yup apologists and creationists do that on this site all the time .Till they get exposed 

 I've seen this done at another site before. 

Yup tons of apologists and creationists do it here .Till they get exposed 

 Bullies like to make themselves look bigger than they really are.

Yes Christians do like using numbers to bully minorities .There other tactic is whining without justification they are being bullied . And again yup it's standard for apologists on this site to try and use multiple accounts . Till they of course get caught by the mods .

[CDF47]

I suspect there are some shills on this site.  

Only one and his name is CDF47

It's a one hundred year practice and it gives the appearance of knowing what you are talking about, intimidation and ridicule tactics, straw man tactics,....  

Yup those are tactics people like you have been using forever against honest intellectuals like us 

I am getting the sense that is at this site.

 Not until you came 

 There are probably one or a few shills that sway things that way or that have multiple usernames.

Yup apologists and creationists do that on this site all the time .Till they get exposed 

 I've seen this done at another site before. 

Yup tons of apologists and creationists do it here .Till they get exposed 

 Bullies like to make themselves look bigger than they really are.

Yes Christians do like using numbers to bully minorities .There other tactic is whining without justification they are being bullied . And again yup it's standard for apologists on this site to try and use multiple accounts . Till they of course get caught by the mods .

I am no shill.  Those are all atheist tricks used on this site like I stated.  Honest intellectuals, LOL.

[Amarok]

I am no shill.  

Yes you are 

Those are all atheist tricks used on this site like I stated. 

Nope those are the tactics of creationists on this site and no one else 

 Honest intellectuals, LOL.

Yup unlike you and the rest of the apologists who have come here that's what we are

[Angrboda]

Not an answer to the question.  You've just replaced DNA with a description of it, not demonstrated that "digital information that programs the construction of highly sophisticated advanced nano molecular machines," cannot arise naturally.

The system makes a 747 jumbo jet look like child's play. Have you ever seen a 747 construct itself?

No, but I've never seen a 747 reproduce, either. Have you? Since the entire theory of how we got DNA in the first place is based on replication, analogizing it to something that doesn't replicate itself is just an invalid analogy. If we saw 747s giving birth to other 747s, the question of the origin of the 747 would not be a simple matter. What other argument do you have that isn't flawed?

[Mister Agenda]

I am going by the most widely excepted science regarding the Big Bang.

You're really, really, not. What existed prior to the initial expansion is highly speculative, and there is no scientific consensus on what was actually the case, merely multiple competing hypotheses that all fit with what we already know and have math that works. They ought to call it hypothetical physics instead of theoretical physics.

How did you determine that what you're presenting is the most widely accepted science regarding the Big Bang?

---

You can't get a universe from nothing, not even a simple universe.  This one is super-symmetrical/fine-tuned and definitely designed by a Creator.

You've been educated on how this is a straw man over and over, and you keep trotting it out. How are we supposed to take that as anything other than dishonest? Making a mistake about our position (or rather, the position of physicists) once is understandable; and doing it over and over after we've explained what our position actually is (conditions prior to the moment before the initial expansion are currently unknown) amounts to trolling.

[The Grand Nudger]

I suspect there are some shills on this site.  It's a one hundred year practice and it gives the appearance of knowing what you are talking about, intimidation and ridicule tactics, straw man tactics,....  I am getting the sense that is at this site.  There are probably one or a few shills that sway things that way or that have multiple usernames.  I've seen this done at another site before.  Bullies like to make themselves look bigger than they really are.

I am no shill.  Those are all atheist tricks used on this site like I stated.  Honest intellectuals, LOL.

.....lol?  Why a "100 year practice"?  Why not fifty or two hundred or eleventy three.  Is there some significance to one hundred.  What happened in 1918 that you think is relevant to your participation on these boards?

[Mister Agenda]

Science has had nearly a century to state how man came about.  They still have not found the link between man and monkey. 

Whoever tried to teach you biology should be ashamed of themselves.

[LadyForCamus]

So, CDF’s argument amounts to:

“The world is designed by god because, duh. Also, I’m not obligated to explain how he did it, so don’t ask.”

I can’t believe he hasn’t convinced anyone yet!

---

Because she’s a dirty, dirty, godless hoe.  That’s why.  😝

Lol oh how I love you!

Right back at you, babe! ❤️

[Mister Agenda]

!Fact! Male hospital patients fall out of bed twice as often as female hospital patients.

Why are you trolling this thread?

At least those facts are facts, while what you call facts are opinions.

---

Not an answer to the question.  You've just replaced DNA with a description of it, not demonstrated that "digital information that programs the construction of highly sophisticated advanced nano molecular machines," cannot arise naturally.

The system makes a 747 jumbo jet look like child's play. Have you ever seen a 747 construct itself?

I've seen RNA construct itself.

---

I am right.

Around here, being reduced to claiming that you're right over and over is considered a pathetic admission that you can't back up your claims.

---

I am no shill.  Those are all atheist tricks used on this site like I stated.  Honest intellectuals, LOL.

We'll know the followers of Jesus by their what now?