RE: Intelligent Design
January 14, 2016 at 4:00 pm
(This post was last modified: January 14, 2016 at 4:17 pm by ApeNotKillApe.)
(January 14, 2016 at 3:37 pm)AAA Wrote:(January 14, 2016 at 3:27 pm)ApeNotKillApe Wrote: Absurdly wrong.
This has been done to death, but if we must go back to the presence of a genetic code, a protein code, and a molecule (tRNA) to connect the languages, we can.
That the system is functional is the ground upon which you argue for a deity; that is not any ground at all, it is a position of ignorance, based on wild contradictory suppositions and speculation. When your assertions are refuted you make new assertions, you come up with some excuse why evidence contrary to your argument "doesn't count". You don't care about evidence or truth, you've already said as much, that evidence isn't always necessary and that the least credible forms of testimony are sufficient evidence for outlandish and farcical claims supported by anecdotal evidence and the more logical fallacies you can use to support it, the better.
I am John Cena's hip-hop album.