DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[pocaracas]

We've got another Drich! Minus the drugs...
So, if you were not looking for anything in particular and claim that only became Christian after that, what were you doing talking to a pastor, instead of a psychologist?
That alone tells me that you were wanting a religious answer to your problem, and that is exactly what you found... as is often the case... as human brains have evolved to operate.
Had you been elsewhere in the world and, instead of a Christian pastor, you went to a Hindu one or a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or whatever, you would now be in one of those religions, don't you think?

[Amarok]

Yes their is and one you need to provide that's actually antiquate to back what your claiming

---

You provided no definition.  Nothing antiquate, nothing defined with you  as the subject interpreting.  Just nothing.  As such, what responsibility and authority do you have to demand any response from me?

Again I don't need to as I'm not the one defending your position you are and your definition  is antiquate to defend it . And it's your choice to dodge giving one but it says a great deal about your position .

---

Yet the video you posted suggested that very thing within it's first statement in the first 15 seconds. "Universal Common Decent" + "Every living thing on earth is related to every living thing on earth"  It even went on to discuss the "split", so that would make the chimp your cousin, aunt, or uncle. (because if not, it would be a parent)  So dependent on how that chain supposedly branched off it would determine the relationship.  If Bobo isn't your uncle, your cousin would be Bobo.

Beaten again by your own source.

Yeah that's not what it says and that's not how common descent works but nice try

---

Because that's what makes it life.

If I never had purpose, I would never have any reason to do anything.  I wouldn't brush my teeth, play with my dogs, go to the gym, climb a mountain, jump out of a plane, or do anything else.  I would just sit around and blink my eyes all day for no apparent reason.

Nope actions make it life weither those actions have any ultimate purpose is aside the fact

[T0 Th3 M4X]

You provided no definition.  Nothing antiquate, nothing defined with you  as the subject interpreting.  Just nothing.  As such, what responsibility and authority do you have to demand any response from me?

Again I don't need to as I'm not the one defending your position you are and your definition  is antiquate to defend it . And it's your choice to dodge giving one but it says a great deal about your position .

---

Yet the video you posted suggested that very thing within it's first statement in the first 15 seconds. "Universal Common Decent" + "Every living thing on earth is related to every living thing on earth"  It even went on to discuss the "split", so that would make the chimp your cousin, aunt, or uncle. (because if not, it would be a parent)  So dependent on how that chain supposedly branched off it would determine the relationship.  If Bobo isn't your uncle, your cousin would be Bobo.

Beaten again by your own source.

Yeah that's not what it says and that's not how common descent works but nice try

---

Because that's what makes it life.

If I never had purpose, I would never have any reason to do anything.  I wouldn't brush my teeth, play with my dogs, go to the gym, climb a mountain, jump out of a plane, or do anything else.  I would just sit around and blink my eyes all day for no apparent reason.

Nope actions make it life weither those actions have any ultimate purpose is aside the fact

What position do you think I'm defending?  I don't feel like I'm on some hot seat to be defensive, so feel free to explain.

[Amarok]

Again I don't need to as I'm not the one defending your position you are and your definition  is antiquate to defend it . And it's your choice to dodge giving one but it says a great deal about your position .

---

Yeah that's not what it says and that's not how common descent works but nice try

---

Nope actions make it life weither those actions have any ultimate purpose is aside the fact

What position do you think I'm defending?  I don't feel like I'm on some hot seat to be defensive, so feel free to explain.

The position you have been defending in this thread . And no you not in a hot seat but again the above stands .

[T0 Th3 M4X]

We've got another Drich! Minus the drugs...
So, if you were not looking for anything in particular and claim that only became Christian after that, what were you doing talking to a pastor, instead of a psychologist?
That alone tells me that you were wanting a religious answer to your problem, and that is exactly what you found... as is often the case... as human brains have evolved to operate.
Had you been elsewhere in the world and, instead of a Christian pastor, you went to a Hindu one or a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or whatever, you would now be in one of those religions, don't you think?

Oh, but I did.  That's also my background.  Not only was I a mental health clinician at the time, I was also working with psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, and anybody else you could imagine would be in that setting. But when you look at something analytically, it's important to be exhaustive in how you research things.  In all of it, the pastor was the one who had the answer.  Working on that team on the time was exactly why I even thought about looking into the category on my own time.  Curiosity as to why something kept coming up, so I did what I do.  I explore.

It wasn't about finding "religion."  It was about dealing with something.  It's funny that you even mentioned Buddhism, because I can't even begin to count the hours I spent previously study it.  As to this day, I find it as one of the most fascinating ideologies out there.  I didn't do it to become a Buddhist, nor did I, but I still respect that approach to life.

Study is a way of life for me.  It still is and probably always will be.  It's just what I do. 

---

What position do you think I'm defending?  I don't feel like I'm on some hot seat to be defensive, so feel free to explain.

The position you have been defending in this thread . And no you not in a hot seat but again the above stands .

What do you think I'm defending?  It's still unclear what you are suggesting.  As far as I know the conversation never went beyond "definitions."  If someone says they won't accept a dictionary for a definition, then there's no point in going any further, because it's not a bias I'm willing to humor.  If anything it should be considered as a starting point, then you work your way outward.

[Amarok]

We've got another Drich! Minus the drugs...
So, if you were not looking for anything in particular and claim that only became Christian after that, what were you doing talking to a pastor, instead of a psychologist?
That alone tells me that you were wanting a religious answer to your problem, and that is exactly what you found... as is often the case... as human brains have evolved to operate.
Had you been elsewhere in the world and, instead of a Christian pastor, you went to a Hindu one or a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or whatever, you would now be in one of those religions, don't you think?

Oh, but I did.  That's also my background.  Not only was I a mental health clinician at the time, I was also working with psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, and anybody else you could imagine would be in that setting. But when you look at something analytically, it's important to be exhaustive in how you research things.  In all of it, the pastor was the one who had the answer.  Working on that team on the time was exactly why I even thought about looking into the category on my own time.  Curiosity as to why something kept coming up, so I did what I do.  I explore.

It wasn't about finding "religion."  It was about dealing with something.  It's funny that you even mentioned Buddhism, because I can't even begin to count the hours I spent previously study it.  As to this day, I find it as one of the most fascinating ideologies out there.  I didn't do it to become a Buddhist, nor did I, but I still respect that approach to life.

Study is a way of life for me.  It still is and probably always will be.  It's just what I do. 

---

The position you have been defending in this thread . And no you not in a hot seat but again the above stands .

What do you think I'm defending?  It's still unclear what you are suggesting.  As far as I know the conversation never went beyond "definitions."  If someone says they won't accept a dictionary for a definition, then there's no point in going any further, because it's not a bias I'm willing to humor.  If anything it should be considered as a starting point, then you work your way outward.

It's clear this will go nowhere .

[pocaracas]

We've got another Drich! Minus the drugs...
So, if you were not looking for anything in particular and claim that only became Christian after that, what were you doing talking to a pastor, instead of a psychologist?
That alone tells me that you were wanting a religious answer to your problem, and that is exactly what you found... as is often the case... as human brains have evolved to operate.
Had you been elsewhere in the world and, instead of a Christian pastor, you went to a Hindu one or a Muslim, or a Buddhist, or whatever, you would now be in one of those religions, don't you think?

Oh, but I did.  That's also my background.  Not only was I a mental health clinician at the time, I was also working with psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, and anybody else you could imagine would be in that setting. But when you look at something analytically, it's important to be exhaustive in how you research things.  In all of it, the pastor was the one who had the answer.  Working on that team on the time was exactly why I even thought about looking into the category on my own time.  Curiosity as to why something kept coming up, so I did what I do.  I explore.

Yes, you were working with those people, but did you talk with them about what you were experiencing?
Or did you self-analyze? Doesn't every professional know that self-analyzing/self-diagnosing is typically a bad idea?

It wasn't about finding "religion."  It was about dealing with something.

"Something" that, from what little you describe makes me wonder if it was not some sleep related thing... combined with an invisible&remote way of conducting electrical signals 📶

  It's funny that you even mentioned Buddhism, because I can't even begin to count the hours I spent previously study it.  As to this day, I find it as one of the most fascinating ideologies out there.  I didn't do it to become a Buddhist, nor did I, but I still respect that approach to life.

You didn't have a mysterious something to deal with when you were learning about Buddhism, so you never thought of it as an answer to any something.
That you sought Christianity in an attempt to answer your something is revealing of your predisposition towards it... or even prior engagement with it. Which makes me wonder as to why you say that you became a christian after this event. How did you see yourself, religiously, prior to that?
How was your upbringing, in terms of contact with religions? On what sort of society did you grow up?

Study is a way of life for me.  It still is and probably always will be.  It's just what I do. 

Same here, man!

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Oh, but I did.  That's also my background.  Not only was I a mental health clinician at the time, I was also working with psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, and anybody else you could imagine would be in that setting. But when you look at something analytically, it's important to be exhaustive in how you research things.  In all of it, the pastor was the one who had the answer.  Working on that team on the time was exactly why I even thought about looking into the category on my own time.  Curiosity as to why something kept coming up, so I did what I do.  I explore.

Yes, you were working with those people, but did you talk with them about what you were experiencing?
Or did you self-analyze? Doesn't every professional know that self-analyzing/self-diagnosing is typically a bad idea?

It wasn't about finding "religion."  It was about dealing with something.

"Something" that, from what little you describe makes me wonder if it was not some sleep related thing... combined with an invisible&remote way of conducting electrical signals 📶

  It's funny that you even mentioned Buddhism, because I can't even begin to count the hours I spent previously study it.  As to this day, I find it as one of the most fascinating ideologies out there.  I didn't do it to become a Buddhist, nor did I, but I still respect that approach to life.

You didn't have a mysterious something to deal with when you were learning about Buddhism, so you never thought of it as an answer to any something.
That you sought Christianity in an attempt to answer your something is revealing of your predisposition towards it... or even prior engagement with it. Which makes me wonder as to why you say that you became a christian after this event. How did you see yourself, religiously, prior to that?
How was your upbringing, in terms of contact with religions? On what sort of society did you grow up?

Study is a way of life for me.  It still is and probably always will be.  It's just what I do. 

Same here, man!  

Oh I spoke with them about it.  No need to self-diagnose.

Nope, wasn't some sleep-related electrical signals.

How did I see myself before that?  Pretty much the same as I do now.  More times than not I look for natural explanations, but I also try not to carry any specific bias that would inhibit understanding in one form or another.  But then again, I would say I work from a more well-defined framework as to how I view the world around me.

You'll just have to take my word for it, but I'm probably once of the most annoyingly analytical person you could ever meet.  Even if I didn't want to be that way, it's just how I am.  I blame it on learning to play Chess when I was younger, and those same principles apply to life.  The strongest position to operate from is in the middle, then you work outward accordingly.

Did you grow up around religion?  What is your outlook on life?

---

Oh, but I did.  That's also my background.  Not only was I a mental health clinician at the time, I was also working with psychiatrists, psychologists, nurses, and anybody else you could imagine would be in that setting. But when you look at something analytically, it's important to be exhaustive in how you research things.  In all of it, the pastor was the one who had the answer.  Working on that team on the time was exactly why I even thought about looking into the category on my own time.  Curiosity as to why something kept coming up, so I did what I do.  I explore.

It wasn't about finding "religion."  It was about dealing with something.  It's funny that you even mentioned Buddhism, because I can't even begin to count the hours I spent previously study it.  As to this day, I find it as one of the most fascinating ideologies out there.  I didn't do it to become a Buddhist, nor did I, but I still respect that approach to life.

Study is a way of life for me.  It still is and probably always will be.  It's just what I do. 

---

What do you think I'm defending?  It's still unclear what you are suggesting.  As far as I know the conversation never went beyond "definitions."  If someone says they won't accept a dictionary for a definition, then there's no point in going any further, because it's not a bias I'm willing to humor.  If anything it should be considered as a starting point, then you work your way outward.

It's clear this will go nowhere .

Agreed. There's nowhere for it to go.

[Amarok]

Yes, you were working with those people, but did you talk with them about what you were experiencing?
Or did you self-analyze? Doesn't every professional know that self-analyzing/self-diagnosing is typically a bad idea?


"Something" that, from what little you describe makes me wonder if it was not some sleep related thing... combined with an invisible&remote way of conducting electrical signals 📶


You didn't have a mysterious something to deal with when you were learning about Buddhism, so you never thought of it as an answer to any something.
That you sought Christianity in an attempt to answer your something is revealing of your predisposition towards it... or even prior engagement with it. Which makes me wonder as to why you say that you became a christian after this event. How did you see yourself, religiously, prior to that?
How was your upbringing, in terms of contact with religions? On what sort of society did you grow up?


Same here, man!  

Oh I spoke with them about it.  No need to self-diagnose.

Nope, wasn't some sleep-related electrical signals.

How did I see myself before that?  Pretty much the same as I do now.  More times than not I look for natural explanations, but I also try not to carry any specific bias that would inhibit understanding in one form or another.  But then again, I would say I work from a more well-defined framework as to how I view the world around me.

You'll just have to take my word for it, but I'm probably once of the most annoyingly analytical person you could ever meet.  Even if I didn't want to be that way, it's just how I am.  I blame it on learning to play Chess when I was younger, and those same principles apply to life.  The strongest position to operate from is in the middle, then you work outward accordingly.

Did you grow up around religion?  What is your outlook on life?

---

It's clear this will go nowhere .

Agreed. There's nowhere for it to go.

Oh it could have gone far but it won't

[downbeatplumb]

[quote='downbeatplumb' pid='1874616' dateline='1546527232']

You have literally given me nothing in return for all the explanations I and others have given, I have asked time and time again for a description of a god and how god did these things and you have given nothing.

Let me say again that to say god did something is not enough if you provide no evidence for that or even a good definition of what a god is.

As far as I can see god is just a cover for you not knowing something.

You don't know, therefore god.

You produce nothing, and you have nothing.  I know therefore "God", you don't know therefore "atheism",

I don't find the idea of god convincing which makes I don't know therefore atheism is a perfectly valid position.
That is all.
Let me break it down for you.
You say "god exists" I say "what is a god?" and you wont tell me.
"look its in dictionaries" you say "But they are vague and incoherent what do you think a god is?" I ask and you say nothing. You wont even set out your position. How am I supposed to find that compelling?

I think that you don't actually know what you think a god is supposed to be. You just heard he word and liked it.

along with things popping out of nowhere, and living things coming from nonliving. Congrats, that's just brilliant. Your whole premise is based on the optical outcome that some day you will die and become tasty worm food.  Wow, now that's something to look forward to.  One thing is true, we all find what we seek in one form or another.  Good luck.

Well I did present material things popping out of nowhere that is a demonstrable fact and there are scientifically viable ideas of how living things could have developed from non-living things that are being investigated, remember science is not finished yet and we do not pretend to know everything, which is where we diverge from theists who do pretend to know everything but do not have anything to back up their unlikely ideas.

But what I can say is that whatever caused life to exist and the universe to begin will turn out to be natural processes just like every other thing that was once attributed to god has turned out to be.

And lets look at what you say is evidence for god.
The existence of a universe and life coming from non-life.

This does not match with the homosexual hating, virgin impregnating heaven controlling god of the bible.
And lets not also forget that god was NOT ALONE. He had the angels of various different orders The sepraphim, cherubin and nephalim some of whom rebelled against him in what sounds like battlefield earth.


Why cant you see that this is all just an old civilisations creation myth, its bleeding obvious that the god idea is just a silly hangover from the past.