DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[I_am_not_mafia]

Oh dear.

That's all you have to add?

I must admit that trying to talk to you is growing tedious. 203 pages of you giving barely more than one sentence answers and you think that's hard work? Life's going to be a surprise for you.

Your argument seems to be that you can tell that DNA is designed because it is complex, but you can't tell what isn't designed because everything in the world is designed.

Why then even mention DNA if everything in the world is designed? Why wasn't your OP just saying this without even trying to backup your assertion by pointing at something complex?

When pressed you just repeat previous assertions which have already been countered, and come up with meaningless nebulous terms like specified complexity, even though you can't actually say how it is different from normal complexity except for more meaningless descriptions like saying it is functional. And if pressed will just come up with some other short pithy statement that means nothing.

Not to mention using every fallacious argument under the sun. You have no idea of what a debate is and why people engage in them. You're just wasting everybody's time because you are not putting in any effort to convince people and are not wanting to learn more yourself.

You should read this List of fallacies. Hint: Try avoiding these. Do not use this as a bucket list.

It's clear from the first few pages in this thread why TTA banned you.

[The Grand Nudger]

The entire case was BS from what I read.  I read in one case the judge just copy and pasted the scientists notes and made minor tweaks.

..............?

ID provides great information on the design of living systems, creation of the universe,...  I never was so enthused about science then when I discovered ID a while ago.  I think it's great. 

ID provides -no- information on the design of living systems, or the creation of the universe.   Psuedo-science is often more interesting than the real deal.  You thinking it;s great doesn;t change the facts of what it is and what it isn't.

I believe the information comes from God.

Your beliefs are irrellevant to an accurate description of where the information in dna comes from.  I thought you said accuracy was important?

I already have worked hard for 203 pages.

---

Below are more irreducibly complex machines:

http://www.arn.org/mm/mb_ic.htm

Nope.

[CDF47]

That's all you have to add?

I must admit that trying to talk to you is growing tedious. 203 pages of you giving barely more than one sentence answers and you think that's hard work? Life's going to be a surprise for you.

Your argument seems to be that you can tell that DNA is designed because it is complex, but you can't tell what isn't designed because everything in the world is designed.

Why then even mention DNA if everything in the world is designed? Why wasn't your OP just saying this without even trying to backup your assertion by pointing at something complex?

When pressed you just repeat previous assertions which have already been countered, and come up with meaningless nebulous terms like specified complexity, even though you can't actually say how it is different from normal complexity except for more meaningless descriptions like saying it is functional. And if pressed will just come up with some other short pithy statement that means nothing.

Not to mention using every fallacious argument under the sun. You have no idea of what a debate is and why people engage in them. You're just wasting everybody's time because you are not putting in any effort to convince people and are not wanting to learn more yourself.

You should read this List of fallacies

It's clear from the first few pages in this thread why TTA banned you.

Life is going to be hard for me?  You have no idea what I've faced in life.  

I've heard that before and refuted it.

I have learned in this thread actually.  I always learn in a debate. 

TTA banned me for no good reason.

---

The entire case was BS from what I read.  I read in one case the judge just copy and pasted the scientists notes and made minor tweaks.

..............?

ID provides great information on the design of living systems, creation of the universe,...  I never was so enthused about science then when I discovered ID a while ago.  I think it's great. 

ID provides -no- information on the design of living systems, or the creation of the universe.   Psuedo-science is often more interesting than the real deal.  You thinking it;s great doesn;t change the facts of what it is and what it isn't.

I believe the information comes from God.

Your beliefs are irrellevant to an accurate description of where the information in dna comes from.  I thought you said accuracy was important?

I already have worked hard for 203 pages.

---

Below are more irreducibly complex machines:

http://www.arn.org/mm/mb_ic.htm

Nope.

ID asks the hard questions.  It discovers some great answers as well.

Accuracy is important.

---

In The Origin of Species Darwin stated:
"If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." This is the case with irreducibly complex systems.

[The Grand Nudger]

ID asks the hard questions.  It discovers some great answers as well.

Nope.

Accuracy is important.

Good, then.. while you're entitled to your own beliefs..you aren;t entitled to your own facts.  The information in dna comes from the environment.

"In The Origin of Species Darwin stated:
'If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.'

-and the world (and this board) is still waiting for a single example of such a thing. You don;t possess one. Behe doesn;t possess one. There "must be many"..and yet no one can produce one. I think it;s a fools errand, and toppling modern synth wouldn;t advance the case for gods a single iota in any way.

[I_am_not_mafia]

ID asks the hard questions.  It discovers some great answers as well.

Accuracy is important.

This is why the thread has grown to 204 pages. You give the barest of replies. It means any insights are completely buried. Or any time that your world view gets pushed to breaking point, it's easier to forget about. Like why your god designs each snowflake when it would be easier to have them all the same.

You could have told us what hard questions ID asks. You could have told us of its great discoveries that you claim it has made. But you didn't. You just asserted in as few words as possible. If you had then you would have had a chance to convince us and we would have had a chance to evaluate your claim. You are just wasting everyone's time.

[CDF47]

ID asks the hard questions.  It discovers some great answers as well.

Nope.

Accuracy is important.

Good, then.. while you're entitled to your own beliefs..you aren;t entitled to your own facts.  The information in dna comes from the environment.

"In The Origin of Species Darwin stated:
'If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.'

-and the world (and this board) is still waiting for a simple example of such a thing.  I think it;s a fools errand, and toppling modern synth wouldn;t advance the case for gods a single iota in any case.

It is too sophisticated to come from the dumb environment.  It comes from advanced intelligence.  Design is detectable.

The Type III Transport and the other machines I posted earlier.

---

ID asks the hard questions.  It discovers some great answers as well.

Accuracy is important.

This is why the thread has grown to 204 pages. You give the barest of replies. It means any insights are completely buried. Or any time that your world view gets pushed to breaking point, it's easier to forget about. Like why your god designs each snowflake when it would be easier to have them all the same.

You could have told us what hard questions ID asks. You could have told us of its great discoveries that you claim it has made. But you didn't. You just asserted in as few words as possible. If you had then you would have had a chance to convince us and we would have had a chance to evaluate your claim. You are just wasting everyone's time.

Because He likes a diversification in snow flakes.  

No matter what I right you would fallibly try to refute.

[I_am_not_mafia]

This is why the thread has grown to 204 pages. You give the barest of replies. It means any insights are completely buried. Or any time that your world view gets pushed to breaking point, it's easier to forget about. Like why your god designs each snowflake when it would be easier to have them all the same.

You could have told us what hard questions ID asks. You could have told us of its great discoveries that you claim it has made. But you didn't. You just asserted in as few words as possible. If you had then you would have had a chance to convince us and we would have had a chance to evaluate your claim. You are just wasting everyone's time.

Because He likes a diversification in snow flakes.  

No matter what I right you would fallibly try to refute.

See, you didn't even respond to my points.

Why are you here CDf47? What do you hope to achieve? Do you think that you have achieved anything here? What did you think was going to happen? Be honest now.

[CDF47]

Because He likes a diversification in snow flakes.  

No matter what I right you would fallibly try to refute.

See, you didn't even respond to my points.

Why are you here CDf47? What do you hope to achieve? Do you think that you have achieved anything here? What did you think was going to happen? Be honest now.

I was hoping some atheist would see the truth in science that there is a Designer.  Not sure if any lurkers have changed their minds.  No matter what i say to the posters on here doesn't matter because they will just fallibly try to refute it.

---

More irreducibly complex machines:

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/ids-to...-machines/

[The Grand Nudger]

It is too sophisticated to come from the dumb environment. 

Your preference for your beliefs won;t change the accuracy of the statement.  

It comes from advanced intelligence. 

If by "advanced intelligence" you mean "the dumb environment"..then..yeah, sure.

Design is detectable.

If you say so, but you'd be talking about what the dumb environment designed.  

The Type III Transport and the other machines I posted earlier.

-aren't examples of irreducible complexity any more than the bacterial flagellum was..as we've already discussed at length.

[I_am_not_mafia]

Why are you here CDf47? What do you hope to achieve? Do you think that you have achieved anything here? What did you think was going to happen? Be honest now.

I was hoping some atheist would see the truth in science that there is a Designer.  Not sure if any lurkers have changed their minds.  No matter what i say to the posters on here doesn't matter because they will just fallibly try to refute it.

You didn't bother making a case in order to convince any atheist. All you did was make a simple post of 110 words and then say that you had won the argument. Do you honestly believe that it was going to convince anyone? Did you honestly believe that people here haven't heard the same argument over and over again argued far more persuasively than a pithy 110 word paragraph?

Did you not expect atheists to try and refute what you said?

Lurkers aren't going to wade through 204 pages of posts. If anything all you have done is demonstrated to anyone questioning their belief that religion really is a delusion.