DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[CDF47]

Where are they finding this?  Like I said, I agree components can be used for other machines. 

 in labs were you creationist noobs are not 

Provide specifics.

So you can ignore them . Then scream conspiracy? 

What is below it.  Like I said, I agree components can be used for other machines.

What?

Alright.

I won't ignore it.  There is only so much I can read though.  Sometimes articles 40 pages long are posted for me to read.  I ignore those.  Maybe read the conclusion.

What is below the pump.  It was already listed in the post above so don't worry about it.

---

How can you be sure that there are many irreducibly complex things when you don;t have a single example of something irreducibly complex?

Because these are functional machines so eventually you will get to a point where you are down to just a few non-functional components which don't do anything.  The step above that would be irreducibly complex.

---

Sure, keep going.

So you can deny it

  I am interested.

No your not 

  I love this subject and if these machines can use different components for other functional machines that is equally impressive to me. 

That affirms it 

 I am sure some are still irreducibly complex

Nope not a one .

---

How can you be sure that there are many irreducibly complex things when you don;t have a single example of something irreducibly complex?

Aside an argument from ignorance or a lack of imagination . Mixed with a false dilemma fallacy .

No, I won't if it is true.

Yes, I am.  I already am reading about that third machine.

Affirms nothing.

I am sure there are some.  See post above.

No, it's not.

---

@Tiz
The Beheian argument tends to run along the lines of "I don;t know stuff, therefore god!".

Now that is a straw man.