DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[CDF47]

1k pages later and it still hasn't.

....and I can't change my position.  The facts are what they are.

---

Not sure what would falisfy some ID ideas.  That has nothing to do with the fact that the information bearing properties of DNA proves the Creator's existence.

Okay.. so you can't think of something that would/might falsify I.D.

Got it.

Could you go off and find some one who has gotten an idea of what would falsify I.D ?

Please post your definite thoughts on whether the ideas of I.D. can be falsified?

Here's the same idea from the evolution side of things.

To make the same claim about Evolution, one could make the claim that:

"To falsify the aspect of the fossil record bolstering the current theory of evolution one needs but find a rabbit fossil along side a trilobite."

Interestingly. You can run that idea kind of in reverse. Such that.

"I predict, using the theory of evolution and how fosils relate to said theory that if we go to certain rocks of a certain age we will find a fossil of this type of life form."

To whit the rpediction and subsequent finding of the fossil of Tiktaalik.

Hence, my previous question to yourself CDF47 about what the current ideas of I.D. might actually predict about life if we might find such on the moons of Jupiter or Saturn?

Regarding life outside this planet, so far the only intelligent life we have found is on Earth.  That may turn out to be the case in this universe.  We've been searching for a long time.  Not sure what we will find on those moons. 

Also, trying to change my position.  My position is related to DNA, not the ID movement.  I know you have that confused on purpose but just thought I'd remind you again.

---

@T0 Th3 M4X

I think you may have missed my post.

Sorry, I did miss it unintentionally.  I think if you miss a day, you get about 5 pages behind in this thread.

Anyway, I never asked for an education on evolution.  I'm very aware of what it is considered.  I'm more interested in individual statements made pertaining to it.  If you lump fiction in with things that are factual, which is why I like to look at claims individually.  That way I'm not saying "yep" or "nope" to all of it.

I don't think that CDF's claim goes against scientific consensus.  Also, saying something "evolved" is a rather generic way to state something.  IMO, it's more important to ask "how", because evolution as a process is limited to how we can refer to it as a "theory" since much of it isn't and is contrary to what is known as science.  The processes claimed are often detrimental to organisms, and there are always problems with making jumps in information for organisms.  For example, saying it happened through mutations would go against what is known scientifically, because we know the likely result of a mutation is disadvantageous.  Thinks like cancer occur because of cell mutation.  Additionally, when mutations add a new feature, it often isn't functional and will often get the organism killed.  Like having a fly grow a third wing.  It loses its efficiency in flying, and is more likely than not to die from its dysfunction or get picked off by a predator due to its inability to escape.  Throw in that "positive" mutations would also need to develop in the reproductive system of male and female in most species, and simultaneously so that they can reproduce, because if not those new traits won't be passed down to offspring.  Even when we do see "evolution" happen, it's mostly speciation, and the genetic information is just being passed on, but not increased.  Sometimes this works, and sometimes this causes offspring to be sterile.   Like when you cross a horse and a donkey.  You end up with a mule, which most end up being infertile due to the differing chromosomal makeup between the horse and the donkey that birthed it.  So I can accept the bits and pieces of "evolution" that are true and observable, but the rest of it is nonsense.

So back to CDF, as I've stated I'm not siding with him or anyone else.  If someone has something, they can show it.  Let facts speak for themselves.

---

So... care to remind me what the claim was? I think that's the best way to move forward... if that is of interest.

Honestly, I'm lost too at this point.  I think it was about 50 pages and 4 days ago.

LOL