DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[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.

Do you understand what the Argument from Personal Incredulity means?





It's a 1,500 year penalty.  Go back to the dark ages.

And take your fucking bible with you.

The opposing side has no real argument against DNA information processing systems.  Just as a bunch of garbage posts; God of the gaps,..., nonsense.

[possibletarian]

The opposing side has no real argument against DNA information processing systems.  Just as a bunch of garbage posts; God of the gaps,..., nonsense.

The argument is generally not against the nature of D.N.A.  But against the irrational attachment of intelligence to it, Nothing you have posted here provides evidence of that link.

Neither do the scientific community (the ones most able to know) attach any form of god or intelligence to it.

[CDF47]

The opposing side has no real argument against DNA information processing systems.  Just as a bunch of garbage posts; God of the gaps,..., nonsense.

The argument is generally not against the nature of D.N.A.  But against the irrational attachment of intelligence to it, Nothing you have posted here provides evidence of that link.

Neither do the scientific community (the ones most able to know) attach any form of god or intelligence to it.

There is absolutely no doubt it is designed, 100 percent for sure.  It is like seeing a 747 jumbo jet and saying I wonder if someone designed and built that or if a tornado dropped it here.  Although DNA is way more complex and specific than a 747 jumbo jet.  I was just using that as an analogy.

[Joods]

Biased.  Any scientist or engineer that has a basic understanding of how DNA works should believe it was designed.  If not, they should have their degrees burnt and all licenses revoked.

And you should have your head examined and be forced to wear a white jacket with straps attached to it.

[CDF47]

Biased.  Any scientist or engineer that has a basic understanding of how DNA works should believe it was designed.  If not, they should have their degrees burnt and all licenses revoked.

And you should have your head examined and be forced to wear a white jacket with straps attached to it.

LOL...That doesn't mean that review wasn't biased.

[Joods]

There is absolutely no doubt it is designed, 100 percent for sure.  It is like seeing a 747 jumbo jet and saying I wonder if someone designed and built that or if a tornado dropped it here.  Although DNA is way more complex and specific than a 747 jumbo jet.  I was just using that as an analogy.

[Pat Mustard]

LOL.  I have deeply examined the evidence and it totally points to a Designer.

Be honest Mr Inquisition, you've studied the crack of my arse more seriously than you've studied any aspect of biology.

If you even made the most cursory examination of the evidence available you'd accept that evolution is true and that the Modern Synthesis is the best model of explanation we have, and a very accurate and predictive one at that.

Creatardism neither explains the current status, fits the available evidence nor can be used to make a prediction about either missing evidence or possible future directions, mainly because it does not seek to describe reality but to try and fit, bend and misshape reality into a straitjacket.

PS I'm also guessing Mr Inquisition has no job, no friends and no activities which take him out of his mother's basement. Otherwise why would he be parked on this thread 24/7?

[pocaracas]

[Fidel_Castronaut]

The argument is generally not against the nature of D.N.A.  But against the irrational attachment of intelligence to it, Nothing you have posted here provides evidence of that link.

Neither do the scientific community (the ones most able to know) attach any form of god or intelligence to it.

There is absolutely no doubt it is designed, 100 percent for sure.  It is like seeing a 747 jumbo jet and saying I wonder if someone designed and built that or if a tornado dropped it here.  Although DNA is way more complex and specific than a 747 jumbo jet.  I was just using that as an analogy

Lol.

I thought about making a post responding to this and then I did. This is the post. I posted what I thought.

Sorry that clarification just cracked me up.

[Mister Agenda]

DNA is proof that living systems are designed and the fine tuning of the universe is proof that the entire universe is designed.

You keep using this word 'proof'. I do not think it means what you think it does.

---

Like the atheist lines change so often, LOL...I post facts which can not be refuted so they are still relevant today as they were then.

You not understanding the refutation is not the same as there having been no refutation.

---

So respond to the post rather than discussing your google search of it.

---

You can come with your army of troll posters and post all the nonsense straw-man arguments and ridicule you like.  However, your tricks can't stand up to the truth that DNA and the universe are designed.

Can you name one thing in that post that is relevant to the conversation and makes a point, that you had not said on this thread already and gotten a response for?

---

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.

You seem to be a liar, CDF. RNA world handily explains 'where the information-bearing properties of DNA come from', and you've never even attempted to refute it. Given that all you can do his repeat ad nauseum that your position is irrefutable without ever addressing why the refutations fail, I can only conclude that it's because you can't...and you know it.

---

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.

None of those responses are recognizable as an actual attempt at a refutation. For instance, I say RNA world, your refutation should point out the critical flaw that makes RNA world wrong. That's how refutations work. Just repeating that DNA has highly specified complexity and proves a designer isn't a refutation, it's just repeating the same unsupported assertion you started with.

---

LOL.  I have deeply examined the evidence and it totally points to a Designer.

Deeply examined the evidence as much as someone who has earned a PhD in molecular biology has?

---

The argument is generally not against the nature of D.N.A.  But against the irrational attachment of intelligence to it, Nothing you have posted here provides evidence of that link.

Neither do the scientific community (the ones most able to know) attach any form of god or intelligence to it.

There is absolutely no doubt it is designed, 100 percent for sure.  It is like seeing a 747 jumbo jet and saying I wonder if someone designed and built that or if a tornado dropped it here.  Although DNA is way more complex and specific than a 747 jumbo jet.  I was just using that as an analogy.

LOL, you used the 747 in a junkyard analogy, and you did it after being given a link to Hoyle's Fallacy. I thought you said you read all of our posts, but this makes me really, really, doubt your honesty about that.