RE: DNA Proves Existence of a Designer
May 4, 2018 at 12:06 pm
(This post was last modified: May 4, 2018 at 12:22 pm by Mister Agenda.)
CDF47 Wrote:Hammy Wrote:CDF47,
I don't accept the premise that DNA can't be explained by natural processes.
But even if I did accept that premise, what makes you think that DNA (or indeed anything) can be explained by unnatural or supernatural processes?
A mind that transcends this universe created it. The proof is in the creation, in the fine-tuning of the universe and in the information in DNA to the molecular machines in the cell.
Sigh. You're assuming creation (which is what you, presumably, want to prove). The apparent fine-tuning of the universe hasn't been established to be actual fine tuning, it presumes the cosmological constants could have varied in ways that we haven't established and that there is only one cosmos, which we also can't know at this time. The 'information' in DNA being the product of a mind is what you ought to be trying to establish, instead of just repeating it over and over as if you already have.
CDF47 Wrote:How could nothing create everything?
How did you establish that there ever was nothing?
CDF47 Wrote:Mister Agenda Wrote:Interacting chemicals are not digital codes.
Genetic information is a digital code.
Definition of: digital code (1) A digital coding system for data in a computer. See ASCII and EBCDIC. (2) A coding system used to abbreviate data; for example, codes for regions, classes, products and status.
dig·i·tal
/ˈdijidl/
adjective
adjective: digital
1. (of signals or data) expressed as series of the digits 0 and 1, typically represented by values of a physical quantity such as voltage or magnetic polarization.
CDF47 Wrote:Mister Agenda Wrote:51% of scientist in the USA, the most religious developed country. And 51% believing in God or a higher power does not imply that 51% think the origin of DNA is intelligent design. And the opinion of scientists on the topic of the origin of DNA who aren't in a field of biology carries no weight, and is an appeal to inappropriate authority.
In the Academy of Science (the 'best scientists'), it's more like 10% who believe in God or a higher power, btw.
Where are your stats coming from. Post a link or quote a source.
Who are you to demand that I act as your research monkey?
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.