So your an Athiest

[AAA]

This will be my last response on this page, because I'm sick of us arguing in circles and not getting anywhere. I don't know that we were produced by an intelligence, but I think that it is a better explanation for the design (which all cases of design where we know the origin proceeds from intelligence) that we see. Until better evidence can reasonably explain a bottom up process that leads to information and increasing complexity, my default position is that the intelligent information had an intelligent designer. You say that life forms show absolutely no evidence of top-down design. That is just a misinformed assertion with no basis in the facts. It shows plenty of evidence of design with complex interplay, and you really have to stretch the theory of evolution to account for their interactivity. Our genome seems to be decreasing in function as time goes on which is more consistent with a top-down design than a bottom up design. Thanks for putting up with my thoughts, and please look at the scientific evidence objectively and keep an open mind. I will try to do the same.

You contradict yourself here by saying you don't know we are a product of intelligence, while insisting that a design exists. You can't have it both ways - if there is a design, then there must be an intelligence behind it! The problem is that there really is no evidence for a design, and the world will probably never see such evidence, no matter how you insist there is. Mix certain elements and compounds together, and the result can have properties unlike either of the components that went into it. We don't know precisely why this happens, but scientists don't jump to conclusions - this is not evidence of design, nor is the far greater complexity of form which evolved and eventually became self-aware over 4.5 billion years. There is no direct evidence that it started by accident, but the fossil record makes it very clear that it began much simpler than you can imagine, and simple enough that it probably was an accident of physical chemistry. This would set up the machine that went on ticking away, producing new information each time another accident occured and continued onward. It's the simplest explanation, which is usually the best one.

What a complicated existence you theists lead, when you have something to prove which you should know you never will. What can be asserted without evidence really can be dismissed without evidence!

If you think abiogenesis was simple, you better go to a biology class and learn just how not simple it is for self replication. The fossil record is incredibly lacking when it comes to the transition from non life to life. One of the first thing that appears is stromatolites, which are structures still produced by bacteria today. If you want to go by the fossil record, then you have to say that the first life was the same type of life as the life today. Talk about contradiction. And if you say design must have a designer, you have accepted God or rejected many evolutionary biologists. A lot say that it is designed, they just say the design arose by undirected natural processes.

---

I'll attempt to define biological information: Irregular sequential organization of monomers, that have no chemical preference for their order, that exist in a way that allows them to accomplish a complex set of goals.

Translation:  "I'll attempt to co-opt yet another term from science into my bible centered worldview."

Go get em' champ.

You try to define biological information then if you're so smart. It isn't easy. Plus every statement in my definition is true.