DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[The Grand Nudger]

I guess some people just aren't intelligently designed to hold up their end of things, MA.  What else would explain it?

[Mister Agenda]

I responded to over 200 posts in the last 100 plus pages.  Can you respond to this one?

You first posed these questions on this thread (obvious cut-and-paste devoid of your own thought, your own words, and un-sourced) in post number 444. It was answered in post 453, 462, and by me in post 666.

How many times do you expect people to respond to the same list of questions, and how many times do you plan to act like we don't have any responses for them? If you're a bot, that would explain pretty much everything about your posts.

---

You mean the ignorant things that inform your belief?

No, I mean those questions that have no natural explanation.

Even if you don't agree with the possible natural explanations; it's dishonest to pretend there aren't any.

---

-and rocks...........

Sure, if you think you can handle the universe too.  I got more questions about that.

What I'm hearing you say is the designer of the universe designs things with dumb Shannon information. Correct?

---

Only 3.1 percent of Americans are atheists according to a 2014 Pew research poll:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/201...-atheists/

I don't understand how in the 21st century any atheists can exist based on recent findings in science.

When asked if they believe in God, 9% of Americans say no. Not everyone who is an atheist identifies as one.

And argument ad populum is a fallacy. When there are more Muslims than Christians in the world, do you think that will make Islam correct? When there were more Hindus than Christians in the world, did that make them correct at the time?

---

Who cares?

Nobody cares about atheism is the point.  Only 3 percent.

Only 3.1% in the latest poll. It was 1.6% in the poll seven years before that. That's a 94% increase in seven years. If you don't care, don't blame us when you get blindsided.

---

No, you fuckin moron.


Better?

Just wanted to make sure you weren't one of those atheists that don't believe in God and don't like Him either which is ridiculous.  You were kind of coming off that way.

I don't believe in Voldemort and I think he's evil. How I feel about a god or God depends on how the writer portrays it.

---

The non existence of God is not dependent on how many atheists there are. The popularity or non popularity of a belief has
absolutely no bearing on how true it is. To suggest that it has is to commit a logical fallacy namely argumentum ad populum

I agree with that.  Was just pointing out it is not as popular as made to seem.

Who exactly was trying to make it seem popular? Creationism isn't popular among scientists who study DNA, who may or may not be atheists. A particularly famous genetic scientist is a Christian...but not a creationist.

---

It does not matter if it popular idiot .

Well, hardly anyone classifies themselves this way so it says at least that.  It is great to see people can still see through the BS arguments thrown out by atheists.

You mean the arguments thrown about by the most respected scientists in the relevant fields.

---

It does not matter if it's popular .Thus your  whole post is meaningless .

It is great to see people can still see through the BS arguments thrown out by atheists.

I thought this thread was supposed to be about DNA, Why did you change the subject of the thread you started?

---

That is a link about atheists not science and there is nothing in it suggesting
the existence of God from recent scientific findings as you have just claimed

I posted the science poll earlier in this thread.  This was to show a generalization.

The science poll that wasn't about how many scientists in relevant fields accept ID over abiogenesis?

---

DNA still doesn't prove existence of a designer; nice try, though.

It sure does.

See, when you assert something without supporting, no one has to give any justification at all for blowing it off. It's just, like, your opinion, man.

---

I've responded 250 times to posts in this thread.  That is plenty as far as I am concerned after 110 pages.

Yeah, but how many of them were things you hadn't already said or asked?

---

Do you have references to this?  Are there videos you can link to?

You know what's better than a linked video? The ability to cogently make your own points in your own words.

---

I brought scientific facts, I didn't call anyone names, and I supported my claims.

I already have proved it.

You brought nature videos about how wonderful and complex DNA is. You never proved that wonderful and complex requires a designer, which is the thing you're claiming. We all know DNA is just the cat's pajamas. Do more than assert want you want to prove.

Drich has been a poster here for years.
I've been a poster here for years. Therefore I'm Drich.

That's the kind of logic we all want you to do better than.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Only 3.1 percent of Americans are atheists according to a 2014 Pew research poll:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/201...-atheists/

When asked if they believe in God, 9% of Americans say no. Not everyone who is an atheist identifies as one.

And only .7% are christians in Saudi Arabia. And Sweden is 46-85% atheist.

CDF47, you know that there is a world outside of America don't you?

[Mister Agenda]

And that poll was just as worthless . Just because a scientist is religious does not make religion or theism  scientific .

No, I believe that poll was in response to an inaccurate statement or by just a statement made by an atheist, if I remember correctly.

I don't think you remember correctly, but I'm easily proven wrong: what was the statement?

[Anomalocaris]

When asked if they believe in God, 9% of Americans say no. Not everyone who is an atheist identifies as one.

And only .7% are christians in Saudi Arabia. And Sweden is 46-85% atheist.

CDF47, you know that there is a world outside of America don't you?

Blasphemy! Jesus doesn’t speak any language other than Americanese with redneck accent.

[Mister Agenda]

I love science.  Clearly, you don't, because you will resort to nonsense and call it science.

Re-read the OP.  It is clear DNA is designed.

It's clear that YOU think it's designed. You being convinced it's designed and not being able to grasp how anyone could possibly disagree with is not proof:

proof
noun

noun: proof; plural noun: proofs

1. evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

You've established the fact that DNA is complex, which hello, everyone here already knew. You haven't established that it's a fact that DNA was designed by a being of some sort and really, you haven't even presented an argument for it. 'It's obvious!' is a claim, not an argument. To those of us aware of the plausible natural explanations, it's not obvious at all. In fact, the more someone knows about DNA, the less likely they are to find it obvious that it was designed. The top people doing original work in the field are the most likely to think it wasn't designed, for instance, or at least most unlikely to think they've proven that it was designed.

Your premise is:

1. DNA is super-complex! (yep, it sure is, sound premise, good work!)
2. Nothing
3. Only things that are designed are super-complex! (unsupported conclusion, the support would be to the right of '2.')

You haven't shown your work, you just repeat your conclusion ad nauseum. What do you have for '2.'?

---

Thanks for confirming what I posted:

You're just a noise generator. A spammer. You don't even know what a debate is.

It's definitely not what the atheists are doing in this thread which is name calling, insults, wining, crying, straw-man arguments,.....

We already tried evidence, logic, and science; but you seem to be immune. Having fun with you is more constructive than trying to get somewhere in a conversation with you under the circumstances.

---

Probability of making a protein:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQoQgTqj3pU

If only we had some idea of how proteins could come to be besides being the first step in abiogenesis instead of a late step. If only....

---

There are only so many posts and links I can read and watch in a 114 page thread that is only days old.

If you refrain from making replies where you only say something you said before or paraphrase what you've already said, the thread would move considerably slower. It's okay to think before you respond, and you don't have to reply to everything as long as you reply to what's most relevant.

---

BS argument = nothing created everything (just natural processes) - yeah right

Natural processes aren't 'nothing'. That is what is called a 'straw man fallacy'. It's what you do when your debate opponent's real position is too hard to refute and you're dishonest.

[CDF47]

I saw it both times.  I read every post but did not have time to respond to all.

According to Hawking's calculations, space had infinite curvature at the beginning of time which means there was no space or time.  That means there was no matter.  Call it a singularity or whatever you want but everything came for a Creator at creation.

Apparently you still haven't read what I posted and also ignored #104 where I told you that there was no matter at the point of the Big Bang. Only energy. Matter came from the energy after the Big Bang.The paper would have told you that and my other post.

How much energy is there in no space and no time?

---

Re-read the OP.  It is clear DNA is designed.

It's clear that YOU think it's designed. You being convinced it's designed and not being able to grasp how anyone could possibly disagree with is not proof:

proof
noun

noun: proof; plural noun: proofs

1. evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

You've established the fact that DNA is complex, which hello, everyone here already knew. You haven't established that it's a fact that DNA was designed by a being of some sort and really, you haven't even presented an argument for it. 'It's obvious!' is a claim, not an argument. To those of us aware of the plausible natural explanations, it's not obvious at all. In fact, the more someone knows about DNA, the less likely they are to find it obvious that it was designed. The top people doing original work in the field are the most likely to think it wasn't designed, for instance, or at least most unlikely to think they've proven that it was designed.

Post source for this.  Is there a Pew or Gallup poll to support this?

Rest of post are more baseless claims.

---

Check out the operation of these proteins/molecular machines (video has not yet been posted in this thread):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_tYrnv_o6A

This is designed!

[LastPoet]

Another LR.

[CDF47]

Leviticus 17:11 "For the life of the flesh is in the blood,..."

[The Grand Nudger]

Allah Akbar!