DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[T0 Th3 M4X]

At work.

I would still appreciate an example.  I don't agree with you, but as to not be insulting, I would like to delve further into what you mean.  Subjective evidence is commonly used, just like objective evidence.

Our conversation is currently about the 'How' of using our language.

You understand, yes?

Consider the statement:

"Doctor, I have been experiencing headaches since yesterday."

The patient just made a subjective statement.  How do you proceed?   Is their subjective evidence that warrants a conclusion?

---

God was waiting to reveal this information to us until 1953 and 1957 when it was discovered that genetic information is functional as a code.

---

 You keep posting these assertions. Each one becoming more disconnected from reality than the next/

Also... If your diety is pwerless to explain things to people when it's gettig them to write things down but, instead, has to wait another few centureis for people to discover things on their own.... Which those discoveries fly in the face of the very things said deity has previously told people to write down.

Makes your diety look completely inompetent, doesn't it?

Also... how' your squaring away your diety MAKING the evil which rebeled against its some how omnipotent, all powerful self?

Y'know, for the devil to be able to rebel against your diety... It has to be at least as powerful as said deity to succesfully rebel, right?

 Now you are making subjective statements.

What deity?  What explanations?  You're not even following the conversation.  That doesn't make any "deity" look incompetent.  It makes you look incompetent, but who cares, right?  It's just friendly conversation, so why elevate it to that.  No need for logical fallacies.  Just explain your position.  I asked for an example, but didn't get one.  I provided one, so you can either agree, disagree, assert a rebuttal, or do nothing.  What else is there?  If you have a rebuttal, then I'll consider it and form my own position "yay" or "nay" based on it.  It can be simple and doesn't have to turn into an argument.

Once you start shifting to other things, it doesn't serve a purpose.  "Deity" has nothing to do with this.  What you're doing is known as  the tu quoque fallacy, or whataboutism.