DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[CDF47]

Well that's a nice welcoming message.

Every post by your detractors in this three pronged clusterfuck of a thread is a welcome message. They are standard issue replies to fundie trolls.

I see your presence in the usual fundie haunts is now zero, why is that?
Why do you so much enjoy the relentless battering you receive here. Is it masochism, self flagellation? Or pehaps did you some time ago realize the story of Christianity is utter bollocks and your mind is in turmoil and what you are doing here is a silent cry for help. A painless Celice.

Or are you (in my firsts estimation) a boring fundie cunt troll?

Please reply soonest.

I ignore the BS tactic of insults the best I can.  It is just a tactic to keep people from posting opposing opinions.

---

CDF47
The rain falls on the just and the un-just alike.

---

Love means never having to say you’re sorry

That is not what love means and that is not Biblical.

---

---

I think I know enough of your opinions to know I totally and whole-heartedly disagree with them.

I strongly doubt that you know enough about anything to disagree in any other way, but...again, I'm not interested in that silly shit.  

Can you provide attribution for this whole-hearted but empty headed statement, or not?

I've read enough in 1300 pages to know I disagree with most of what you say.  You do not believe in a Creator for some reason.  I disagree with this totally.

---

Yabut, "god" made the trees, too.  Ipso facto the information in the trees came from a mind, like all information, just not your mind.  It's the same ridiculous circle as before with design.

Show a person some undesigned thing, they swear it's also godesigned.  Show a person a designed thing that didn't come from any mind, they swear that the thing that did the designing came from a mind, and that that mind in turn came from a god.  All of this is obvious, ofc.  It's pointless to treat these beliefs as some sort of postulate that the holder will rationally adopt or abandon, because they simply aren't.  They have a history as part of a social movement, but beyond that, nada.  

Case in point...from the beginning of this thread (and any other "design" thread) a person can adopt a very accepting stance towards the putative claim.  That there is some design to life.  Sure, okay, we can take that and see that it's compatible, at least in principle, with the facts of biology.  We even understand the set of laws and circumstances that produced it - but this won't be acceptable to a creationist, that's not what they're talking about.  They don't think things were "designed" any more than they think "information" comes from minds.  Natural designs and information have nothing to do with what they're trying to express.  They think the answer to every question, and obviously so, is tinker goddidit.  

That's it, that's all.  The rest is fluff and filler.  LOL, a thousand pages of filler.  There's no example of design or information that they haven't already decided somehow ultimately comes from tinkergod, because their belief that all things ultimately come from the tinker god is the only thing informing these assertions - none of which...despite constant protestations to the contrary, are actually informing their belief in the tinkergod.

You still have not come remotely close to explaining the information bearing properties of DNA. All you do is go back to this example of things which are not all three components of complex and specified and functional.

---

Every post by your detractors in this three pronged clusterfuck of a thread is a welcome message. They are standard issue replies to fundie trolls.

I see your presence in the usual fundie haunts is now zero, why is that?
Why do you so much enjoy the relentless battering you receive here. Is it masochism, self flagellation? Or pehaps did you some time ago realize the story of Christianity is utter bollocks and your mind is in turmoil and what you are doing here is a silent cry for help. A painless Celice.

Or are you (in my firsts estimation) a boring fundie cunt troll?

Please reply soonest.

His nonsensical replies give him a feeling of self-importance. I have no doubt that he actually fancies himself to be an intelligent person, which he clearly isn't. It's also obvious that he is enamored with the sound of his own voice; a rather sad case. Notice how he never comes up with any rational counterarguments, but replies with nothing more than denials and contradictions, all the while thinking that he's winning a debate. 

This is just more discussion for me.  The debate was won with the first post in this thread in the OP, LOL.

---

5. Do I need to point out he's highly religious and thus has a personnel stake and that he's shown sympathy for ID .

No, the guy is a dishonest and cowardly creationist .... His video and his long introduction trying to link his credentials to the subject of creation and then just making arguements against evolution shows his dishonesty  .... Those in the field don't need to spend ten minutes trying to link their authority to the issue they are discussing  .... but if you look at his own statement prior (see my last post), he admits he is a 'Layman' as regards the subject.

As regards where his true bias lays, he was one of the few genuine scientists that signed the 'Discovery Institute’s "A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism" (2001)'

The reason I call him cowardly is he decietfully produced this video to offer arguements against evolultion, though purposefully made no actual claims as regards creationism and specifically distanced himself from God/christianity and ID  ..... 

This guy wants to arm creationists without putting his money where is mouth is  .... Selling his garbage as a Layman, though decieving his followers that his credentials are relevant.

Basically he walks a very fine line .... gives enough for ignorant ID christians to think they have a credited champion to boost anjd add credibility to their fallacies, while not giving enough for scientists to pull him up on his bullshit 

He opposes the scientific establishment which is wrong at times throughout history.  He makes a really solid case for design.