DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[CDF47]

The attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something (such as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects

The DNA itself doesn't produce specific effects, that is the result of the machinery surrounding it in the cell.  Like any other information, the meaning of a code is dependent upon it being embedded in a system that interprets the encoded information.  There is nothing "inherent" there whatsoever, so you're starting off on the wrong foot.   Information isn't inherent but a byproduct of system behaviors.  A strand of DNA sitting on a rock doesn't do anything at all.  In that environment, the DNA contains no information.

---

DNA contains information.  Information based on human observation always comes from a mind or an intelligence.  Therefore, DNA came from a Mind or Intelligence.  This information in DNA by the way, is the most highly complex and specific information in the known universe.

And the explanation for the existence of mind or intelligence?  There are two possible explanations for mind/intelligence.  One is that it is supernatural in origin and perhaps has always existed.  The other is that it arose from natural processes.  So your inductive argument reduces to, "Information based on human observation may be supernatural in origin or it may be natural in origin."  Pardon me if I'm not impressed with your conclusion that information might not be a naturally occurring thing.

Beyond that, your argument is an induction that because we do not know of any alternative paths from nature to information, therefore no such paths are likely.  Besides being essentially an argument from ignorance, all it takes is the production of one such path to topple your argument.  Do you know that no such path will ever be found?  No, you don't.

---

I don't believe there is any proof for it.  I don't believe man descended from apes either.

It really doesn't matter whether there is "proof" for it or not.  You are making an affirmative case here that depends on showing that macro-evolution could not have happened, not simply appealing to ignorance.  So far, the bulk of your argument is that it (DNA) couldn't have happened any other way but by the act of an intelligence.  In order to demonstrate your claim, you have to show that both evolution and abiogenesis are impossible.  Otherwise, all you've got is a fallacious appeal to ignorance.

It was a 0 point, a singularity.  How much energy can be contained in 0 space.  0, then all of a sudden bang.