DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[ReptilianPeon]

Hasn't Professor P. Z. Myers given a presentation which explain that 90%+ of DNA is in fact useless? He says you can build entire retro viruses from the information found in human DNA. That's amazing. To think there is so much junk found inside humans...

[Bucky Ball]

You mean the gospel writers?
Can you call them historians? or were they more story tellers?



Verily I say unto thee... heed the false words of others, as you trust mine own, for you know in your heart that I speak the Truth.
- by Every-Snake-Oil-Salesman-Ever

I mean historians in addition to the gospel writers.  

Snake oil salesman are bad in Christianity but it is good to be able to discern the true men of God from the wolves in sheep clothes.

Actually no. The gospels are not "history" in any sense. 
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline...spels.html

The finest most conservative (religious) scholars agree that the gospels cannot be taken as historical. 
They are statements of faith ... by people who already believed. 

In 1952, a team was set in place by the world-famous, preeminent scholar, archaeologist and pioneer discoverer of Holy Land historical sites and documents, Dr. William Foxwell Albright, the professor of Semitic languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Their job was to write criticisms and scholarly work concerning all biblical texts. The team was composed of the most respected biblical scholars in the US and Europe, including Dr. John W. Bailey, Professor Emeritus, New Testament, Berkley Baptist Divinity School, Dr Albert E. Barnett, Professor Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Dr. Walter Russell Bowel, Professor, The Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Virginia, Dr. John Bright, Professor, Union Seminary and many others.

The team of 124 clergymen and scholars came mostly from conservative, mainline universities and churches for the most part, the likes of whom will never be seen again in one place, whose names evoke the utmost and deepest respect, even if one completely disagrees with their religious views. They wrote the huge 13 volume set, now considered a valuable rare book, called "The Interpreters Bible". Today it is usually kept under lock and key in seminaries and libraries. This set includes an introduction to scholarship and looks at every single verse and word in the Bible, discusses their origins and possible meanings from various points of view. It has been updated in the 1990's, but the original scholarship is still the central fundamental summary of knowledge, which summarized scholarship from the Medieval period (1850's -1950's) and is therefore considered to be an interesting historical snapshot. It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting and commanded world-wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life-long teachers, academics and scholars. 

On page 15 of "The Interpreters Bible", Dr. Herbert F. Farmer, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University wrote about the indispensability of the texts, their importance and how the "truth" of them should be approached, after an exposition of the traditional conservative Christian view of person-hood, sin and the salvific actions of Jesus (aka Yeshua ben Josef), known as "the Christ" in human history.

"The reason has to do with the evidence afforded by the texts themselves, and calls for fuller treatment. Scholarly research into the texts themselves, has convincingly shown that they cannot be accepted in detail as they stand."

He then continues by discussing the details of what a "faith document" is and how it differs from what we would consider an historical text today. The next chapter, authored by Dr. Arthur Jeffrey, Professor of Semitic Languages at Columbia, deals with the formation of the Old Testament canon. He wrote what is seen as the fundamental insight in modern Biblical Study and summarized the central academic position of every mainline, respected, and credible center of Biblical scholarship in the world today :

"Historians can merely state that a canon of scripture is not something given, but something humanly devised. From the historical point of view, the canon is the result of human decision as to which among the religious writing existing in a community are those in which it recognizes the authentic voice of religious authority speaking to man."

[CDF47]

Hasn't Professor P. Z. Myers given a presentation which explain that 90%+ of DNA is in fact useless? He says you can build entire retro viruses from the information found in human DNA. That's amazing. To think there is so much junk found inside humans...

Actually it is not referred to as junk DNA anymore.  It is non-coding DNA and it serves a purpose.  It acts like the operating system.  Pretty complex stuff.  DNA has nested coding.  DNA has a files within folders hierarchical structure.  There are spell checker enzymes (quality control built into the system).  A senior Microsoft software engineer says DNA follows similar Design Patterns (design manual) which Microsoft uses for software development.  Bill Gates also stated that DNA is like a software program but one far more advanced than they have been able to devise. 

---

I mean historians in addition to the gospel writers.  

Snake oil salesman are bad in Christianity but it is good to be able to discern the true men of God from the wolves in sheep clothes.

Actually no. The gospels are not "history" in any sense. 
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline...spels.html

The finest most conservative (religious) scholars agree that the gospels cannot be taken as historical. 
They are statements of faith ... by people who already believed. 

In 1952, a team was set in place by the world-famous, preeminent scholar, archaeologist and pioneer discoverer of Holy Land historical sites and documents, Dr. William Foxwell Albright, the professor of Semitic languages at the Johns Hopkins University. Their job was to write criticisms and scholarly work concerning all biblical texts. The team was composed of the most respected biblical scholars in the US and Europe, including Dr. John W. Bailey, Professor Emeritus, New Testament, Berkley Baptist Divinity School, Dr Albert E. Barnett, Professor Candler School of Theology, Emory University, Dr. Walter Russell Bowel, Professor, The Protestant Episcopal Seminary, Virginia, Dr. John Bright, Professor, Union Seminary and many others.

The team of 124 clergymen and scholars came mostly from conservative, mainline universities and churches for the most part, the likes of whom will never be seen again in one place, whose names evoke the utmost and deepest respect, even if one completely disagrees with their religious views. They wrote the huge 13 volume set, now considered a valuable rare book, called "The Interpreters Bible". Today it is usually kept under lock and key in seminaries and libraries. This set includes an introduction to scholarship and looks at every single verse and word in the Bible, discusses their origins and possible meanings from various points of view. It has been updated in the 1990's, but the original scholarship is still the central fundamental summary of knowledge, which summarized scholarship from the Medieval period (1850's -1950's) and is therefore considered to be an interesting historical snapshot. It is also an assurance that these absolutely respected leading intellectuals from the 20th Century scholarship, of whom most were religious, have agreed to have each other's names associated with their own and that they felt comfortable with what each other were saying in an academic setting and commanded world-wide respect as conservative, careful, and sincere, life-long teachers, academics and scholars. 

On page 15 of "The Interpreters Bible", Dr. Herbert F. Farmer, Professor of Divinity at Cambridge University wrote about the indispensability of the texts, their importance and how the "truth" of them should be approached, after an exposition of the traditional conservative Christian view of person-hood, sin and the salvific actions of Jesus (aka Yeshua ben Josef), known as "the Christ" in human history.

"The reason has to do with the evidence afforded by the texts themselves, and calls for fuller treatment. Scholarly research into the texts themselves, has convincingly shown that they cannot be accepted in detail as they stand."

He then continues by discussing the details of what a "faith document" is and how it differs from what we would consider an historical text today. The next chapter, authored by Dr. Arthur Jeffrey, Professor of Semitic Languages at Columbia, deals with the formation of the Old Testament canon. He wrote what is seen as the fundamental insight in modern Biblical Study and summarized the central academic position of every mainline, respected, and credible center of Biblical scholarship in the world today :

"Historians can merely state that a canon of scripture is not something given, but something humanly devised. From the historical point of view, the canon is the result of human decision as to which among the religious writing existing in a community are those in which it recognizes the authentic voice of religious authority speaking to man."

Did you ever read the book or see the movie "The Case for Christ."  It is based on a true story about an investigation into the Bible.  I have only seen the movie.  Below is information on the book and movie:

https://www.amazon.com/Case-Christ-Journ...0310209307

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6113488/

[Bucky Ball]

Hasn't Professor P. Z. Myers given a presentation which explain that 90%+ of DNA is in fact useless? He says you can build entire retro viruses from the information found in human DNA. That's amazing. To think there is so much junk found inside humans...

Actually it is not referred to as junk DNA anymore.  It is non-coding DNA and it serves a purpose.  It acts like the operating system.  Pretty complex stuff.  DNA has nested coding.  DNA has a files within folders hierarchical structure.  There are spell checker enzymes (quality control built into the system).  A senior Microsoft software engineer says DNA follows similar Design Patterns (design manual) which Microsoft uses for software development.  Bill Gates also stated that DNA is like a software program but one far more advanced than they have been able to devise. 

You must quote a geneticist (scientist). You have no authority or knowledge of the subject. 
Scientists in general do not accept the bullshit. 
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9452500/ns/tec...nt-design/

Behe told the "Dover" court that Astrology was science. (LOL)
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8...room-told/
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Kitzmille...Is_Science

Behe admitted he has nothing. 
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com...no-theory/

You know SO little about the subject you PRETEND to go on about, you cannot refute ONE thing in the actual chemistry of this Nobel Laureate : 





WHy is it you are unable to define "complexity" and tell us what is or is not "complex enough" to require a designer. 
You are unable to state at what point in increasing complexity, a designer becomes necessary. 


Explain in detail, (chemically) why a crystalline lattice does NOT require a designer. 
Or do they ? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure
If your bs has any merit, you will be able to tell us where the complexity boundary is crossed to "designer is necessary", and why structures simpler that the boundary you will propose do not need a designer.


75 % of our DNA is junk, after all.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/214...after-all/

What possible good would DNA from Neanderthals do for humans ?
https://knpr.org/npr/2017-10/neanderthal...acEALw_wcB

[CDF47]

Actually it is not referred to as junk DNA anymore.  It is non-coding DNA and it serves a purpose.  It acts like the operating system.  Pretty complex stuff.  DNA has nested coding.  DNA has a files within folders hierarchical structure.  There are spell checker enzymes (quality control built into the system).  A senior Microsoft software engineer says DNA follows similar Design Patterns (design manual) which Microsoft uses for software development.  Bill Gates also stated that DNA is like a software program but one far more advanced than they have been able to devise. 

You must quote a geneticist (scientist). You have no authority or knowledge of the subject. 
Scientists in general do not accept the bullshit. 
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9452500/ns/tec...nt-design/

Behe told the "Dover" court that Astrology was science. (LOL)
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8...room-told/
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Kitzmille...Is_Science

Behe admitted he has nothing. 
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com...no-theory/

You know SO little about the subject you PRETEND to go on about, you cannot refute ONE thing in the actual chemistry of this Nobel Laureate : 





WHy is it you are unable to define "complexity" and tell us what is or is not "complex enough" to require a designer. 
You are unable to state at what point in increasing complexity, a designer becomes necessary. 


Explain in detail, (chemically) why a crystalline lattice does NOT require a designer. 
Or do they ? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure
If your bs has any merit, you will be able to tell us where the complexity boundary is crossed to "designer is necessary", and why structures simpler that the boundary you will propose do not need a designer.


75 % of our DNA is junk, after all.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/214...after-all/

What possible good would DNA from Neanderthals do for humans ?
https://knpr.org/npr/2017-10/neanderthal...acEALw_wcB

When there is complex functional information there is a designer.  It is found in the DNA molecule.

[Anomalocaris]

Do you truly hate your god so much that you go through such ridiculous length to pin the blame for the muddled disgrace of undesigned randomized stupidity such as yourself - the one crime of which he is demonstrably and entirely innocent - upon him?

[Angrboda]

Did you ever read the book or see the movie "The Case for Christ."  It is based on a true story about an investigation into the Bible.  I have only seen the movie.  Below is information on the book and movie:

https://www.amazon.com/Case-Christ-Journ...0310209307

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6113488/

Strobel.  Ahahahahahahahahaha!



The Case Against Lee Strobel

[Bucky Ball]

You must quote a geneticist (scientist). You have no authority or knowledge of the subject. 
Scientists in general do not accept the bullshit. 
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9452500/ns/tec...nt-design/

Behe told the "Dover" court that Astrology was science. (LOL)
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8...room-told/
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Kitzmille...Is_Science

Behe admitted he has nothing. 
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com...no-theory/

You know SO little about the subject you PRETEND to go on about, you cannot refute ONE thing in the actual chemistry of this Nobel Laureate : 





WHy is it you are unable to define "complexity" and tell us what is or is not "complex enough" to require a designer. 
You are unable to state at what point in increasing complexity, a designer becomes necessary. 


Explain in detail, (chemically) why a crystalline lattice does NOT require a designer. 
Or do they ? 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crystal_structure
If your bs has any merit, you will be able to tell us where the complexity boundary is crossed to "designer is necessary", and why structures simpler that the boundary you will propose do not need a designer.


75 % of our DNA is junk, after all.
https://www.newscientist.com/article/214...after-all/

What possible good would DNA from Neanderthals do for humans ?
https://knpr.org/npr/2017-10/neanderthal...acEALw_wcB

When there is complex functional information there is a designer.  It is found in the DNA molecule.

You have answered NONE of the questions. You have not defined "complex functional information".
Assertions without support are dismissed for the nonsense they are. You have provided no support.
You were asked about a boundary. Why can't you answer the question ?

The formulas which define the orbits of multiple complex celestial objects/systems, the probability algorithms of Quantum Mechanics are "complex functional information". Are these formulas or motions designed ?
The fact is your definition commits the "post hoc" and "regression" fallacies.

You actually blew your wadd for ANY credibility when you said the universe was chaotic, and there was no reason to see the order which is observed.  

Answer ALL the questions. Every question which remains unanswered demonstrates the falsehood of the ID nonsense.

[CDF47]

When there is complex functional information there is a designer.  It is found in the DNA molecule.

You have answered NONE of the questions. You have not defined "complex functional information".
Assertions without support are dismissed for the nonsense they are. You have provided no support.
You were asked about a boundary. Why can't you answer the question ?

The formulas which define the orbits of multiple complex celestial objects/systems, the probability algorithms of Quantum Mechanics are "complex functional information". Are these formulas or motions designed ?
The fact is your definition commits the "post hoc" and "regression" fallacies.

You actually blew your wadd for ANY credibility when you said the universe was chaotic, and there was no reason to see the order which is observed.  

Answer ALL the questions. Every question which remains unanswered demonstrates the falsehood of the ID nonsense.

Look up the words complex, functional, and information and put it together.

[Bucky Ball]

You have answered NONE of the questions. You have not defined "complex functional information".
Assertions without support are dismissed for the nonsense they are. You have provided no support.
You were asked about a boundary. Why can't you answer the question ?

The formulas which define the orbits of multiple complex celestial objects/systems, the probability algorithms of Quantum Mechanics are "complex functional information". Are these formulas or motions designed ?
The fact is your definition commits the "post hoc" and "regression" fallacies.

You actually blew your wadd for ANY credibility when you said the universe was chaotic, and there was no reason to see the order which is observed.  

Answer ALL the questions. Every question which remains unanswered demonstrates the falsehood of the ID nonsense.

Look up the words complex, functional, and information and put it together.

Um .... no. You already did that and it came up with a big nothing.
You fail again. If you yourself cannot specify EXACTLY how this definition applies to your theory, you have no theory,
and the fact that you can't answer questions, set boundaries, or even discuss the meanings of the words, discuss what is included, and what is excluded,
means ... all you have is hot air.

BTW .... Lee Strobel ..... LMAO. A journalist who interviewed people friendly to his own view. I think we all see the delusional little world you live in.
How about read "The Case Against The Case For Christ". LOL. He's nothing but an ignoramus, (not unlike you) who has NO EXPERTISE in the field he dabbles in as an amateur.  
I think he's conned Liberty U into actually paying him for his garbage.
No questions being answered ... why is that ? Can't Jebus send in the smart ones ?

How RNA may have spontaneously formed has been demonstrated in the lab.
https://phys.org/news/2013-12-scientists...r-rna.html

All you have is a "god of the gap" argument, that in general, science does not buy.