DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Not paying for a wild goose chase of what someone claims exists.  It's not bias against atheists though.  I'm the same way for people trying to sell me tickets to Bigfoot expeditions.  They think they're right too, and maybe they are, but don't care as long as the picture is fuzzy that they are shaking in front of me.

But he does buy tickets to the Jebus show, and that wild goose chase. 
He thinks he's right about that, too, just like every other theist in history whose gods have eventually been dismissed as nonsense. 
He's shaking his fuzzy Jebus picture in front of us, a Jebus who is powerless to do anything. 
He 's doing exactly the thing he's whining about. 
He's also try (as per his usual) to place the responsibility for actually learning about the world on others, instead of himself. 
He'd rather remain ignorant.

I mean seriously, in 10,000 years from now, they think that humans (while STILL waiting for Jebus to come again) humans will still be looking to a long-ago ancient preacher for anything. LOL

Come on Bucky.  I think you're approaching the world record for refuting yourself with your own statements.  For someone who constantly states they're a "scientist", I would think that you would understand the importance of proper citations.  If someone claims something, then it's reasonable for them to share where they obtained their information, so someone else can come to that same conclusion, or even repeat the assertions in order to validate them.  If you think asking for citations is "whining", then congrats on calling every scientist out there a whiner.  In fact, you might as well call every professional out there who deals in literature a whiner, because we all depend on writing and receiving good citations.  That's one of the most important components to being scientific.  We can gain new knowledge based on what is already known.

Also, the responsibility isn't on me to uphold the claims of other people.  If you think it is, you're just drifting further away from reality.  But no problem, it doesn't change the reality that I'm not going to do your work for you.   If you say something and come up with nothing, it's on you.  If you do have something, then happy to look at it assuming it's reasonably cited and I don't have to jump through hoops to find what you claim exists.

---

What are you asking proof for, Max? Catch me up.

At this point, I don't even know.  At least three different claims about science, especially during the past 150 years, that supposedly support the views of said individuals and refute the claims of CDF47's.  Of course it also changed to "relevant" science when I questioned that, then I wanted to know what was considered "relevant" and who got to choose and why.  Now I guess I'm supposed to purchase a journal subscription and sort through thousands of journals to find the info on my own.  That's pretty much where it's at now.  From my perspective of course.  Thus my claim of a "wild goose chase." 

I'm really not trying to take sides here.  I don't hold to special I.D. ideology, even though I believe in creation, because I think what is known can get diluted when people add on their own ideas of what may or may not have happened.  In other words, I don't own a time machine and I dunno because I wasn't there.

BTW, nice to see ya again.