DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[CDF47]

CDF - You probably have some 1st cousins, but just in case you don't, let's assume you do.

Your common ancesters are your grandmother & grandfather. You both have the same grandparents.

With 2nd cousins you both will have the same great grandparents. The great grandparents are a common ancester.

If we look at US Presidents for example. Their genealogy is well documented. If you go back far enough, you find that they all are distant cousins.

Former President Obama and Former President George Bush are 10th cousins, once removed, linked by Samuel Hinkley of Cape Cod, who died in 1662.

10th cousins mean they share a common ancester.
In this case, the have the same great great great great great great great great great grandfather.
(Samuel Hinkley)

Obama & Bush share a common ancester.

If we compared the genealogy of everyone on this forum, you'll find we are all distant cousins with some common ancester. You just have to keep tracing back.

Homo sapiens.
Homo habilis.
Homo erectus.
Homo floresiensis.
Homo neanderthalensis.
Homo heidelbergensis.
Homo rudolfensis.

These are the various species of the homo group that we all descended from.

And if you trace their lineage back you find we share a common ancester with all the great apes and our closest cousins are chimpanzees.

I'm sorry to burst this bubble, but Adam, Lilith & Eve are a work of fiction. Human beings were never created from dirt or ribs.

You have been lied to your entire life and I know that must be hard to deal with.

By the way.... No Santa Claus either.

The information in DNA proves there is a Creator.  Evolution is part of the design.  Where I disagree is that we share a common ancestor with the great apes.  I believe we all descended from Adam and Eve, one man and one woman.

---

No disputed by serious scientists.

Such as?

  I did not evolve from a monkey. 

Strawman. Nobody is making that claim.

I descended from the first man and woman.

No such thing. Want to claim there was? Provide evidence. You can't.

No fringe reset for you.

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer and others.

DNA shows we descended from one man and one woman.

---

No, I am not.  I have been wrong before but I don't think I am in this case.  There is no common ancestry with man and monkey.

Yes you are . Yes you are . There most definitely is

No, I am not.  No, I am not.  No, there most definitely is not.

---

What brings forth the question, "What does it mean to be human?"

I'd go with.... is reality still there in the absence of all human/conscious minds?

Qualitative data can be a prerequisite to quantitative data.  In regard to science. I have a dual science degree, yet sometimes I don't want to be the scientist. Sometimes I want to go outside and play with my dogs. Sometimes I want to play a video game. Sometimes I want to spend time with family.  They can all apply to each other, but sometimes the science gets put on the back burner.  I can visit my mom and talk about cultural trends or quantum mechanics, but it adds little to that relationship and she's not likely to understand anyway.  I would say the relational aspect supersedes it.  I remember in the movie the Matrix, there was a scene when one guy sells out the "good guys" and his payment was bliss.  He could've continued to understand the Matrix, but he preferred the product of such instead.  So which is wrong?  What are the values?  Is a quantifiable conscious better than a content conscious.  Neither, because it is the choice of the individual.  I can't say your decision is optimal for me, and vice versa, and the determining factor of those choices is ourselves.

I'd say it depends on the purpose.
If your purpose is to claim something about reality, then you'll have to apply all the science you can, for that is what science is all about: figuring out what reality is like and how it works.
If your purpose is to enjoy life, then you can live in your world, with your dogs, your mom, your video games and never need to care much about the intricacies of reality. Just go with intuition, for that works well enough.

The trouble arises when people intermingle these and claim something about reality based on their intuitions. Intuitions which are well known to produce faulty results in certain extreme conditions... such as those that we see here on this thread "DNA proves the Existence of a designer" - It looks like a super complex machine, so it must be designed, so, knowing that no human conscience was around at the time DNA came into being, there must have been an external designer, so let's call that god and move on. Right? This is what CDF has been saying all along, right? All the while, others have been pointing out that the evolutionary mechanism can, without any guidance or forethought, without intentionality or design, it can produce the very complexity we observe in the DNA machinery. It's difficult to conceive of all the steps that go from abiogenesis to DNA, and there is still much work left to be done in this field to show how it can be done, so this option is felt as impossible by many, given that their intuition is not sufficient to deal with the concepts involved. If evolution is impossible, then design is the only possibility, or so CDF claims.

The one thing I disagree with is I do agree there is evolution but I just define that as adaptions.

---

No disputed by serious scientists.  I did not evolve from a monkey

 
That's actually a blatant falsehood.
Among virtually ALL scientists in the fields which would deal with this, agree we and monkeys had a common ancestor.
This dude is ignorant and incompetent to say anything on the subject.

It's disputed.

---

What were those ape like ancestors called?

"ape like"

You're welcome.  

Thanks..LOL