DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[The Valkyrie]

Well, DENIM is proof of a type of designer.

Especially if it's a good pair of well fitting jeans.

[CDF47]

I spent the time to read every response to my posts. Not one even came close to explaining where the information bearing properties of DNA come from. DNA contains a highly sophisticated "functional" code which encodes for proteins and directs protein synthesis. It is information processing at its best. No one can come close to refuting these truths because they are irrefutable but nice attempts using cheap debating tricks and slander.

[possibletarian]

I spent the time to read every response to my posts.  Not one even came close to explaining where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  DNA contains a highly sophisticated "functional" code which encodes for proteins and directs protein synthesis.  It is information processing at its best.  No one can come close to refuting these truths because they are irrefutable but nice attempts using cheap debating tricks and slander.

Yes so you have said, but for something that people cannot come close to refuting, the scientific community seems rather unimpressed.

Why not simply address the questions put before you if they are that easy to refute ?

These are exactly the same tactics it's clear you have been using for years, if you want to believe it, there is no harm in that. But if you want to express it as more than a opinion and/or faith position to an unconvinced scientific community then you are going t have to do a lot better than this.

[Amarok]

 spent the time to read every response to my posts. Not one even came close to explaining where the information bearing properties of DNA come from. DNA contains a highly sophisticated "functional" code which encodes for proteins and directs protein synthesis. It is information processing at its best. No one can come close to refuting these truths because they are irrefutable but nice attempts using cheap debating tricks and slander.

[The Grand Nudger]

I spent the time to read every response to my posts.  Not one even came close to explaining where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  DNA contains a highly sophisticated "functional" code which encodes for proteins and directs protein synthesis.  It is information processing at its best.  No one can come close to refuting these truths because they are irrefutable but nice attempts using cheap debating tricks and slander.

That;s not actually true..but it wouldn;t matter if it were..since no one owes you an explanation nor would anyone failing to present you with an explanation somehow make the whole bag default to some silly god.

[Amarok]

I spent the time to read every response to my posts. Not one even came close to explaining where the information bearing properties of DNA come from. DNA contains a highly sophisticated "functional" code which encodes for proteins and directs protein synthesis. It is information processing at its best. No one can come close to refuting these truths because they are irrefutable but nice attempts using cheap debating tricks and slander.

---

His position in a nutshell

[CDF47]

I spent the time to read every response to my posts.  Not one even came close to explaining where the information bearing properties of DNA come from.  DNA contains a highly sophisticated "functional" code which encodes for proteins and directs protein synthesis.  It is information processing at its best.  No one can come close to refuting these truths because they are irrefutable but nice attempts using cheap debating tricks and slander.

That;s not actually true..but it wouldn;t matter if it were..since no one owes you an explanation nor would anyone failing to present you with an explanation somehow make the whole bag default to some silly god.

It's proves a Designer and Creator.  It has theological implications.  I believe the ID Designer and Creator is the God of the Bible but others in the ID community don't all think that way.  I have my reasons though.

---

I actually did read every response in all 70 pages of this thread. I responded to tons of them but I am slowing down on responses now because we have been going in circles. I don't plan on leaving though, at least for now.

---

Is this the playbook you are following rather than arguing with any intelligent thoughts of your own:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uPqqp8KVuQU

[Pat Mustard]

Is Mr Inquisition still arguing the same bankrupt and long disproven creatard assertions as if they were facts?

I've long stopped listening to him. The babbling of fools is more instructive.

[CDF47]

Is Mr Inquisition still arguing the same bankrupt  and long disproven creatard assertions as if they were facts?

I've long stopped listening to him.  The babbling of fools is more instructive.

Keep trying to mimic Dawkins like his puppet.

[Pat Mustard]

Is Mr Inquisition still arguing the same bankrupt  and long disproven creatard assertions as if they were facts?

I've long stopped listening to him.  The babbling of fools is more instructive.

Keep trying to mimic Dawkins like his puppet.

Not mimicing Dawkins Mr Inquisition. Just stating bald fact.

When you adopt the position of "I'm too incurious to examine the evidence, therefore goddidit", you have to expect that reasonable people will laugh at you. Because there's no other sane option than derision and ridicule.