DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Rahn127]

Then you are wrong

No, I am not.  I have been wrong before but I don't think I am in this case.  There is no common ancestry with man and monkey.

And again you would be wrong.

We share a common ancestry with all life.

The last common ancestor of plants and animals lived around 1.6 billion years ago and was a single celled organism, neither plant nor animal itself. ... All known living organisms on earth share a common ancestor.

Our closest living relative is the chimpanzee.
We have 99% shared DNA

All of this is proven science.

[CDF47]

No, I am not.  I have been wrong before but I don't think I am in this case.  There is no common ancestry with man and monkey.

And again you would be wrong.

We share a common ancestry with all life.

The last common ancestor of plants and animals lived around 1.6 billion years ago and was a single celled organism, neither plant nor animal itself. ... All known living organisms on earth share a common ancestor.

Our closest living relative is the chimpanzee.
We have 99% shared DNA

All of this is proven science.

No, this is disputed science.

[Rahn127]

And again you would be wrong.

We share a common ancestry with all life.

The last common ancestor of plants and animals lived around 1.6 billion years ago and was a single celled organism, neither plant nor animal itself. ... All known living organisms on earth share a common ancestor.

Our closest living relative is the chimpanzee.
We have 99% shared DNA

All of this is proven science.

No, this is disputed science.

Oh do most definitely believe that you believe it's disputed.
Kinda like how some people believe the earth is flat. Those people dispute the science as well.
You are the biological equivalent of a flat earther.

[CDF47]

No, this is disputed science.

Oh do most definitely believe that you believe it's disputed.
Kinda like how some people believe the earth is flat. Those people dispute the science as well.
You are the biological equivalent of a flat earther.

No, this is totally different.  A flat Earth is just nonsense someone made up.  The science you speak of is actually disputed.

[Rahn127]

Oh do most definitely believe that you believe it's disputed.
Kinda like how some people believe the earth is flat. Those people dispute the science as well.
You are the biological equivalent of a flat earther.

No, this is totally different.  A flat Earth is just nonsense someone made up.  The science you speak of is actually disputed.

That's exactly what a flat earther would say.

[CDF47]

No, this is totally different.  A flat Earth is just nonsense someone made up.  The science you speak of is actually disputed.

That's exactly what a flat earther would say.

There's a lot of things a flat earther would say or someone who believes they were abducted by aliens.  I don't believe in any of those.  

The science is disputed.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

No, this is disputed science.

Oh do most definitely believe that you believe it's disputed.
Kinda like how some people believe the earth is flat. Those people dispute the science as well.
You are the biological equivalent of a flat earther.

What are you talking about? Do you even know what science is?  Because what you're doing is exactly what we don't do in scientific study.  How do you equivocate what he said with "flat earther?"

[CDF47]

Oh do most definitely believe that you believe it's disputed.
Kinda like how some people believe the earth is flat. Those people dispute the science as well.
You are the biological equivalent of a flat earther.

What are you talking about? Do you even know what science is?  Because what you're doing is exactly what we don't do in scientific study.  How do you equivocate what he said with "flat earther?"

He basically said someone that believes common ancestry is disputed and not likely is like a flat earther of biology.

[Anomalocaris]

Then you are wrong

No, I am not.  I have been wrong before but I don't think I am in this case.  There is no common ancestry with man and monkey.

I am sure monkeys would also deny common ancestry with you.  But the apparently agreements stems from different causes. In your case it is out of ignorance and stupidity, in the case of monkeys it would be out of justifiable if misplaced pride. Neither of you speaks from educated evaluation of facts.

[CDF47]

Sure. If we were to assume a 0 value to the existence of Scooby Doo and say he doesn't exist, it would become exhaustive to understanding how he exists.  It's conclusive to you as an individual, but not exhaustive as a whole.  In science, the general emphasis is to study relationships between two or more subjects, then assign a value to those relationships.

It would make more sense to rule out Scooby Doo, defined by his character, as existing organically.  That would still allow us to consider how he exists conceptually in society.  We can rule out the organic existence because we know how the Scooby Doo character originated, but we can still continue to gather knowledge about Scooby Doo and other relationships involving him.

Which is exactly what we do with gods.  We know that they exist, like scooby doo exists, and because of what we know about their existence we can state with confidence as a fact of the matter that neither scooby doo nor gods are running around out there solving mysteries....or designing life.

Did you see the historical Jesus post? I posted it above with a link to an article.  It's a continuation of our previous debate over this.  I think it was you debating the historicity of Jesus with me.

---

No, I am not.  I have been wrong before but I don't think I am in this case.  There is no common ancestry with man and monkey.

I am sure monkeys would also deny common ancestry with you.  But the apparently agreements stems from different causes.  In your case it is out of ignorance and stupidity, in the case of monkeys it would be out of justifiable if misplaced pride.    Neither of you speaks from educated evaluation of facts.

We did not evolve from a monkey.