The absurd need for logical proofs for God

[Paleophyte]

We know what endogenous retroviruses (ERV) are. They're not simply useless, they're downright dangerous. Kindly explain why we have them. While you're at it, explain why we have 99% of the same ERV that chimpanzees do. In the same locations, with the same mutations, and the same LTR lead-ins and lead-outs.

That's simply not true. Two minutes of research online in this subject will tell you that they are mostly harmless because they acquired inactivating mutations , and so most of them can no longer produce actual viruses.

Mostly harmless is not harmless. None of which demonstrates any use for these viruses that make up some 8% of our genome. So useless and worse than useless.

And I am not really into these flawed comparisons with chimpanzees, regardless of which location in our genome. We also share 50% of our genes with bananas, clearly we can't conclude anything.

What you're into is immaterial, as is your opinion of what its flaws might be. The similarity of location, mutation, and LTRs in human and chimp DNA can only be explained by common ancestry.

Argument by assertion. How novel. How utterly wrong. As you stroll along William Paley's beach you'll notice a pocket watch and go, "Wow! That must have been designed!" You'll ignore all the sand and pebbles and waves because your brain recognizes them as lacking either function or design.

In this case my brain would be appealing to ignorance. If you can't think of any function or aspect of design in sand and pebbles, it doesn't mean it's not there.

Neither does it mean that it is there. You know how the Burden of Proof works. He who makes the absurd claim that this apparently functionless sand grain is Designed gets to provide the evidence. Have fun with that.

No, we have reasonable observation of things that lack design. Design is based upon efficient function. Anybody arguing from inefficient function is arguing for an incompetent Designer. Unless god has a penchant for entropy and black holes this universe is exceptionally poorly designed.

Nope. That's completely false. This flawed understanding of efficiency is the source of all the trouble atheists have with the argument from design. So, read what follows out loud and remember it verbatim : Efficiency is a relevant concern only if we have a problem of limited resources.

An all-powerful god DOES NOT have this problem, the word "waste" is ill-defined because all resources can be rendered unlimited.

Efficiency is also a matter of competence. Only a moron makes a pocket watch with a mast and rudder. Design is easy to spot by what it isn't.

The fraction of the universe that intelligent life can survive in is so vanishingly small that only a lack-wit would have built it that way, and only the heirs to the kingdom of imbeciles would worship it.

The argument from fine-tuning is self-defeating. What competent Deity uses physical constants in the first place?

What competence(arrogance?) you think you have to instruct a deity on how to create a universe ?

I'm not instructing any deity. I'd have to believe in them to do that. I'm simply pointing out that a deity doesn't need anything as sloppy as physical constants. A Designed universe doesn't need gravity. Things fall because The Designer Wills them to. All arguments from fine-tuning and design fail because they explicitly admit to physics and biochemistry that no competent deity woud be caught dead soiling its hands with.