DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Amarok]

That's all you guys do is ridicule and talk sh**.  

Nope we refute your nonsense and then we throw in some nice jabs because your absurdity warrants it . 

That is your go to most the time and you want to be the majority in this country someone mentioned. 

nope we refute your nonsense . But i don't really care about becoming the majority 

No thanks. 

Uh huh i have no doubt you wouldn't like that. it would kill your argument ad populum 

Anyway, I watched the video yesterday.  So Dawkins felt it was badly edited for his one part regarding the pamspermia.  That part may have been poorly edited.  Not sure.  I'd have to see the original.  I know movies and media can really do a hack job on a video so I can't say either way.

He was . Stein asked Dawkins if ID was possible . He said it was possible that and advanced civilization could have seeded life on earth . Note at no point did he say he believed this .He said it was possible. Then somehow it was depicted as if this was what he believed .

---

The molecular machines are irreducibly complex.  Take away a part and the system fails or is degraded.

False

---

This is not embarrassing crushing atheists in a debate about DNA.

Lol keep dreaming .The only embarrassment in this thread is you ignorance of DNA.And our utter annihilation of your creationist propaganda and lies on the subject .

---

Does not totally fit the idea. 

 Yes it does 

Only in that article you cited does it fit the idea.  

You mean the article that made an airtight case for why it fits the idea .

I disagree with that article and so does the CIA World Factbook

I don't care that you disagree the case is solid . And the CIA world fact book did not refute the case in the article . So argument from authority .

[CDF47]

Advocates of irreducible complexity have yet to produce a single irreducibly complex thing.

I'm not sure what your point was originally.

Two posts above your own..in direct response.

Bacterial flagellum motor is irreducibly complex as well as other molecular machines.

[Amarok]

I think it's a combination of both Astreja.  He has His plan and His will be done but we also have free will to make decisions.  We are not robots.

Contradiction . 

Yes, I believe He is willing and able to adjust parts of His plan based on what humans do (prayers,...) without changing anything in the Bible.

Nonsense

---

Bacterial flagellum motor is irreducibly complex as well as other molecular machines.

Already been refuted 

https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/

http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/isnt-it-true...ve-evolved

http://www.nas.edu/evolution/IntelligentDesign.html

There has yet to be an example of irreducible complexity that was not an argument from ignorance

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity

http://skeptico.blogs.com/skeptico/2005/...e_com.html

[CDF47]

That's all you guys do is ridicule and talk sh**.  

Nope we refute your nonsense and then we throw in some nice jabs because your absurdity warrants it . 

That is your go to most the time and you want to be the majority in this country someone mentioned. 

nope we refute your nonsense . But i don't really care about becoming the majority 

No thanks. 

Uh huh i have no doubt you wouldn't like that. it would kill your argument ad populum 

Anyway, I watched the video yesterday.  So Dawkins felt it was badly edited for his one part regarding the pamspermia.  That part may have been poorly edited.  Not sure.  I'd have to see the original.  I know movies and media can really do a hack job on a video so I can't say either way.

He was . Stein asked Dawkins if ID was possible . He said it was possible that and advanced civilization could have seeded life on earth . Note at no point did he say he believed this .He said it was possible. Then somehow it was depicted as if this was what he believed .

---

The molecular machines are irreducibly complex.  Take away a part and the system fails or is degraded.

False

---

This is not embarrassing crushing atheists in a debate about DNA.

Lol keep dreaming .The only embarrassment in this thread is you ignorance of DNA.And our utter annihilation of your creationist propaganda and lies on the subject .

---

Does not totally fit the idea. 

 Yes it does 

Only in that article you cited does it fit the idea.  

You mean the article that made an airtight case for why it fits the idea .

I disagree with that article and so does the CIA World Factbook

I don't care that you disagree the case is solid . And the CIA world fact book did not refute the case in the article . So argument from authority .

No, you use ridicule as a debate tactic like your leader Richard Dawkins has instructed you.

Becoming the majority was mentioned somewhere.

I really hope that never happens in this country.

I saw the film.  It may be edited weird.  Not sure if it is a video hack job though.

True.

Please, you wish. I won this debate by speaking truth. No, BS tactics used.

No it doesn't.

Yeah, that weak article.

The CIA World Fact Book lists it as a Constitutional Federal Republic.  I'll go with that.

---

I think it's a combination of both Astreja.  He has His plan and His will be done but we also have free will to make decisions.  We are not robots.

Contradiction . 

Yes, I believe He is willing and able to adjust parts of His plan based on what humans do (prayers,...) without changing anything in the Bible.

Nonsense

---

Bacterial flagellum motor is irreducibly complex as well as other molecular machines.

Already been refuted 

https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/

http://evolutionfaq.com/faq/isnt-it-true...ve-evolved

http://www.nas.edu/evolution/IntelligentDesign.html

There has yet to be an example of irreducible complexity that was not an argument from ignorance

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity

Not nonsense or contradictory.  He allows change within the framework of His plans.  It is His will and it is clear in the Bible that if it matches His will He will answer prayers,..., within the framework of the Bible.

It is irreducibly complex but a reduced version of it can serve as a pump.  It's brilliant.

[The Grand Nudger]

Bacterial flagellum motor is irreducibly complex as well as other molecular machines.

You've been misinformed.  Nature is full of functional flagellum with missing parts.  They're leveraged for protein export, and they've changed very little since adaptation.

You realize that you just destroyed your own claim..right?

---

Lemme ask you some questions.  Are you at all concerned that every single thing you've brought to our attention about this allegedly intelligent design and designer has been completely wrong? Is that the pattern you were looking to build, is this what you were lead to believe was accurate, and are you representing your faith or yourself in a way even remotely close to whatever goal you might have in either area?

[Amarok]

No, you use ridicule as a debate tactic like your leader Richard Dawkins has instructed you.

Nope ridicule is what you do when someone says something dumb. Dawkins is not my leader i don't even like him . And i don't care what he instructs . I ridicule you not for tactics or instruction i do because your creationist ideas are retarded .  

Becoming the majority was mentioned somewhere.

I don't care i have no interest in that 

I really hope that never happens in this country.

I'm sure you don't 

I saw the film.  It may be edited weird.  Not sure if it is a video hack job though.

Uh huh 

True.

Please, you wish. I won this debate by speaking truth. No, BS tactics used.

Lol no you did not you lost hands down even with your creationist talking points and lies . Straight up propaganda pushing from start to now .  

No it doesn't.

Yes it does

Yeah, that weak article.

Nope that strong article that made an air tight case 

The CIA World Fact Book lists it as a Constitutional Federal Republic.  I'll go with that.

Once again it did not refute the article . It does not matter what you go with . The case is air tight .

[CDF47]

Bacterial flagellum motor is irreducibly complex as well as other molecular machines.

You've been misinformed.  Nature is full of functional flagellum with missing parts.  They're leveraged for protein export, and they've changed very little since adaptation.

You realize that you just destroyed your own claim..right?

---

Lemme ask you some questions.  Are you at all concerned that every single thing you've brought to our attention about this allegedly intelligent design and designer has been completely wrong?  Is that the pattern you were looking to build, is this what you were lead to believe was accurate, and are you representing your faith or yourself in a way even remotely close to whatever goal you might have in either area?

If specific parts are removed it can perform as a pump. That pump is then irreducibly complex. It's actually brilliant. With certain parts it is a pump, add some parts and it is an outboard motor. A brilliant mind must have been behind that.

[The Grand Nudger]

The flagellum isn't irreducibly complex after all, then, is it?

In a completely stunning twist..neither is the "pump". It;s called precursor protein translocation.

[Amarok]

Not nonsense or contradictory.  He allows change within the framework of His plans.  It is His will and it is clear in the Bible that if it matches His will He will answer prayers,..., within the framework of the Bible.

Yes it is 

It is irreducibly complex but a reduced version of it can serve as a pump.  It's brilliant.

Self refuted

If specific parts are removed it can perform as a pump. That pump is then irreducibly complex. It's actually brilliant. With certain parts it is a pump, add some parts and it is an outboard motor. A brilliant mind must have been behind that.

And each part can function as something else and etc etc etc. And no evolution is behind it .

http://sandwalk.blogspot.ca/2011/12/torl...cible.html

[Ravenshire]

Anyway, I watched the video yesterday.  So Dawkins felt it was badly edited for his one part regarding the pamspermia.  That part may have been poorly edited.  Not sure.  I'd have to see the original.  I know movies and media can really do a hack job on a video so I can't say either way.

He was . Stein asked Dawkins if ID was possible . He said it was possible that and advanced civilization could have seeded life on earth . Note at no point did he say he believed this .He said it was possible. Then somehow it was depicted as if this was what he believed .

Bad editing?!?

Stein the Fraud commits a serious act of quote mining and IDiot Boy tries to pass it off as bad editing? That's just fucking sad.

Got to hand it to IDiot Boy, though. He's a persistent little cuss. Even going so far as to quote someone who has openly stated that he placed IDiot Boy on ignore.