DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Nay_Sayer]

CDF47:

Fify

[Mister Agenda]

What makes them excellent scientists, in your opinion? That is, what makes them so much better than the average scientist?

Dr. Meyer earned his PhD from Cambridge.  He is a very intelligent man if you read his materials and listen to him speak and debate.  He knows his science, that's for sure.  Dr. Behe is highly intelligent in this way as well.

Wow, that really makes him stand out from all the low IQ scientists without PhDs, huh? I bet they wish they could be excellent scientists like those two, but they have to settle for running experiments and discovering new things, when it's books and debates that make you an EXCELLENT scientist.

---

You personally want it to be too complicated.  You personally want the only explanation to be design through a creator.  You are jumping ahead of science by inserting your subjective answer of "god" into it, bypassing knowledge for a readily comforting answer.

Information of this sort only ever comes from a mind or an intelligence.  That is why I use the words design and created.

Everything we've observed to have been designed was produced by biological organisms with a physical brain, so we will never discover anything designed that wasn't produced by a biological organism with a physical brain.

It's not great logic, but it's still better founded than yours.

---

Hey, theres an interesting one, actually.  Computers write code.  Do computers possess mind or intelligence?

Computers need to be designed and built by intelligent designers.  They then need to be programmed to do programming.  Similarly, the universe and living systems are designed and created to perform design and creation.

You mean like through unconscious processes that produce seemingly-designed products, like snowflakes and DNA?

---

-a claim betrayed by the admission that computers produce such information.

Computers are designed and built by an intelligence.  A programmer then programs a computer what to do.  It took a number of first causes to get a computer to program.

By definition, there can be no more than one 'first cause'.

---

Oh balls.  There are different ways to conceive of information, primarily Shannon's or the Kolmogorov-Chaitin.  CSI is just pseudoscientific bullshit.

CSI is an important aspect of science.  ID is used in multiple fields like archeology, anthopology, forensics, SETI,...

And what is a standard unit of measurement for CSI?

[Amarok]

You mean like through unconscious processes that produce seemingly-designed products, like snowflakes and DNA?

Oh no that's the wrong information .Because ID needs it to be .Oh and the Ad hoc excuses that god is behind the snowflakes. In such a way as it looks like it's nature being nature .

---

And what is a standard unit of measurement for CSI?

Mount rushmore apparently

---

Wow, that really makes him stand out from all the low IQ scientists without PhDs, huh? I bet they wish they could be excellent scientists like those two, but they have to settle for running experiments and discovering new things, when it's books and debates that make you an EXCELLENT scientist.

Oh no you see there is this conspiracy that an ID propaganda film that's refuted six ways from Sunday says is happening . And it not just  an excuse ID advocates cooked up to excuse their failures.

---

Everything we've observed to have been designed was produced by biological organisms with a physical brain, so we will never discover anything designed that wasn't produced by a biological organism with a physical brain. 

It's not great logic, but it's still better founded than yours

Or you could be more specific and point to the fact we have never seen" design" as described outside of human artifics . And have zero reason to believe that any exists outside human design . Accept by fallacy .

[The Grand Nudger]

Would you like to revise your earlier statements then, and claim that a paper airplane is intelligent, for example, since it was also created by us?   I feel like you're reflexively disagreeing more out of fear, than sense.

This is pretty mundane stuff.

It is not intelligent but it is complex and specified and has a Creator.

So, then, if a paper airplane is not intelligent, the fact that a computer is.. is not for having been created by us..this is a trait that a computer shares with unintelligent things, like paper airplanes.  

I;m entirely uninterested in your creator beliefs, at present...though I;m amused that you capitalized it out of habit even though you were referring to human beings.

Moving forward, if you're ready to participate..now.

A mindless intelligence can account for the sorts of information which you take to be instructive.  Agreed?

[CDF47]

It is not intelligent but it is complex and specified and has a Creator.

So, then, if a paper airplane is not intelligent, the fact that a computer is.. is not for having been created by us..this is a trait that a computer shares with unintelligent things, like paper airplanes.  

I;m entirely uninterested in your creator beliefs, at present...though I;m amused that you capitalized it out of habit even though you were referring to human beings.

Moving forward, if you're ready to participate..now.

A mindless intelligence can account for the sorts of information which you take to be instructive.  Agreed?

It takes an intelligent mind to be instructive.

[Foxaèr]

It takes an intelligent mind to be instructive.

Not really.

[The Grand Nudger]

So, then, if a paper airplane is not intelligent, the fact that a computer is.. is not for having been created by us..this is a trait that a computer shares with unintelligent things, like paper airplanes.  

I;m entirely uninterested in your creator beliefs, at present...though I;m amused that you capitalized it out of habit even though you were referring to human beings.

Moving forward, if you're ready to participate..now.

A mindless intelligence can account for the sorts of information which you take to be instructive.  Agreed?

It takes an intelligent mind to be instructive.

Not what I asked you, no more true than the last thing you said to avoid answering a simple question, and frankly...disappointing.

You tell me when you're ready to participate in your own thread.  K?

[CDF47]

It takes an intelligent mind to be instructive.

Not really.

The first cause had to be an intelligent mind that built the machine.

---

It takes an intelligent mind to be instructive.

Not what I asked you, no more true than the last thing you said to avoid answering a simple question, and frankly...disappointing.

You tell me when you're ready to participate in your own thread.  K?

The first cause had to be an intelligent mind that built the machine.

[Foxaèr]

Not really.

The first cause had to be an intelligent mind that built the machine.

Incorrect, and I will repeat it for every time you repeat your nonsense.

[The Grand Nudger]

---

Not what I asked you, no more true than the last thing you said to avoid answering a simple question, and frankly...disappointing.

You tell me when you're ready to participate in your own thread.  K?

The first cause had to be an intelligent mind that built the machine.

All MRE meat slices are made of tuna.