DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Did you find me some dark matter or highly compressed rock yet?  If not, chop chop, get to it.  Don't have billions of years to wait on your "science."

Google and YouTube are your friends, Church Lady.
Get back to you prayers and Bable quoting.
If you REALLY did buy into theism, you'd be praying right now.

It's amazing how you have time to be here all day every day ... something's not right in River City.

Oops, another Bucky fail. AKA...pseudo-science defeated by reality.

Your science is no good here.  Get that nonsense outta here!

[downbeatplumb]

Google and YouTube are your friends, Church Lady.
Get back to you prayers and Bable quoting.
If you REALLY did buy into theism, you'd be praying right now.

It's amazing how you have time to be here all day every day ... something's not right in River City.

Oops, another Bucky fail. AKA...pseudo-science defeated by reality.

Your science is no good here.  Get that nonsense outta here!

So what you seem to be doing is asking for evidence, then complain when we ask the same.

Dark matter and energy are both testable theories whereas the god idea does not make the grade as it isn't testable.
In the language of science "its not even wrong".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

The phrase "not even wrong" describes an argument or explanation that purports to be scientific but is based on invalid reasoning or speculative premises that can neither be proven correct nor falsified. Hence, it refers to statements that cannot be discussed in a rigorous, scientific sense.[1] For a meaningful discussion on whether a certain statement is true or false, the statement must satisfy the criterion called "falsifiability"—the inherent possibility for the statement to be tested and found false. In this sense, the phrase "not even wrong" is synonymous to "nonfalsifiable".[1]
The phrase is generally attributed to theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or careless thinking.[2][3] Rudolf Peierls documents an instance in which "a friend showed Pauli the paper of a young physicist which he suspected was not of great value but on which he wanted Pauli's views. Pauli remarked sadly, 'It is not even wrong'."[4] This is also often quoted as "That is not only not right; it is not even wrong", or in Pauli's native German, "Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig; es ist nicht einmal falsch!". Peierls remarks that quite a few apocryphal stories of this kind have been circulated and mentions that he listed only the ones personally vouched for by him. He also quotes another example when Pauli replied to Lev Landau, "What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not."[4]
The phrase is often used to describe pseudoscience or bad science and is considered derogatory.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong#cite_note-Bukerman-1][/url]

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Oops, another Bucky fail. AKA...pseudo-science defeated by reality.

Your science is no good here.  Get that nonsense outta here!

So what you seem to be doing is asking for evidence, then complain when we ask the same.

Dark matter and energy are both testable theories whereas the god idea does not make the grade as it isn't testable.
In the language of science "its not even wrong".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

The phrase "not even wrong" describes an argument or explanation that purports to be scientific but is based on invalid reasoning or speculative premises that can neither be proven correct nor falsified. Hence, it refers to statements that cannot be discussed in a rigorous, scientific sense.[1] For a meaningful discussion on whether a certain statement is true or false, the statement must satisfy the criterion called "falsifiability"—the inherent possibility for the statement to be tested and found false. In this sense, the phrase "not even wrong" is synonymous to "nonfalsifiable".[1]
The phrase is generally attributed to theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or careless thinking.[2][3] Rudolf Peierls documents an instance in which "a friend showed Pauli the paper of a young physicist which he suspected was not of great value but on which he wanted Pauli's views. Pauli remarked sadly, 'It is not even wrong'."[4] This is also often quoted as "That is not only not right; it is not even wrong", or in Pauli's native German, "Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig; es ist nicht einmal falsch!". Peierls remarks that quite a few apocryphal stories of this kind have been circulated and mentions that he listed only the ones personally vouched for by him. He also quotes another example when Pauli replied to Lev Landau, "What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not."[4]
The phrase is often used to describe pseudoscience or bad science and is considered derogatory.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong#cite_note-Bukerman-1][/url]

Show me if you say it exists.  If not, I might have to bring in Kung Fu Panda to take care of your claims.

[pocaracas]

So... what happens if we put time in reverse?... Does it decrease in capacity?

If we need to get this technical, then I would suggest first defining "intelligence" so we can determine if we can measure it and how, and which point I would be happy to continue.

Intelligence is usually defined as the ability to solve problems... let me see in the dictionary...

I hope this is a satisfactory source:
https://philosophynow.org/issues/98/Info...telligence
""
Unlike belief and knowledge, intelligence is not information: it is a process, or an innate capacity to use information in order to respond to ever-changing requirements. It is a capacity to acquire, adapt, modify, extend and use information in order to solve problems. Therefore, intelligence is the ability to cope with unpredictable circumstances. But intelligence is not merely analytical: to survive and flourish in society, we must also have social and emotional intelligence.
""

But then there is also this one:
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.100...0-0870-9_3
""
There is no agreed-upon definition of the concept of intelligence neither in psychology nor in philosophy. Experts’ definitions differ widely.
[...]
the power of good responses from the point of view of truth or facts (Thorndike) — the ability to carry on abstract thinking (Terman) — having learned or ability to learn to adjust oneself to the environment (Colvin) — the capacity for knowledge (Henmon); the capacity to acquire capacity (Woodrow)
""


If you disagree with these guys, feel free to provide your own and let's go from there.

[Anomalocaris]

Google and YouTube are your friends, Church Lady.
Get back to you prayers and Bable quoting.
If you REALLY did buy into theism, you'd be praying right now.

It's amazing how you have time to be here all day every day ... something's not right in River City.

Oops, another Bucky fail. AKA...pseudo-science defeated by reality.

Your science is no good here.  Get that nonsense outta here!

You realize that very picture is pseudoscience, right?  There is a certain extremely basic conservation of momentum thingy of which your ignorance is showing through as you brag stupidly of your supposed familiarity with the science thing.

The thing with dark matter and dark energy is sufficiently basic part of current scientific understanding of the universe no one who has any pretense to minimal interest in modern science, or indeed understand at a minimum level what science is, should demand that others explain it to them. Even if the person was so lazy as to have never looked it up himself, he should know where to look it up and not betray a simultaneous ignorance, conceit and laziness by demanding other explain it to them.

So bozo, you don’t know what science is. So spare us the hot and cold about “pseudo” science.

[Mister Agenda]

If we're getting into Dark Matter, maybe a new thread is in order. This one is about DNA, I think.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Oops, another Bucky fail. AKA...pseudo-science defeated by reality.

Your science is no good here.  Get that nonsense outta here!

You realize that very picture is pseudoscience, right?  There is a certain extremely basic conservation of momentum thingy of which your ignorance is showing through as you brag stupidly of your supposed familiarity with the science thing.

The thing with dark matter and dark energy is sufficiently basic part of current scientific understanding of the universe no one who has any pretense to minimal interest in modern science, or indeed understand at a minimum level what science is, should demand that others explain it to them.  Even if the person was so lazy as to have never looked it up himself, he should know where to look it up and not betray a simultaneous ignorance, conceit and laziness by demanding other explain it to them.

So bozo, you don’t know what science is.  So spare us the hot and cold about “pseudo” science.

It's an illustration.  So even better if his pseudo-science is being defeated by a concept of pseudo-science.

You two both need to stop making things up.  This isn't make believe land.   Either put up or shut up if you claim something exists.

[Peebothuhlu]

  .... Either put up or shut up if you claim something exists.

I.... am confused M4X.

What is it about the observation that Astronomers have made about which you seem to not accept?

That;

A) As we look farther and father away/out/back in time the more and more 'Red shifted' said images appear. Hence leading to the understanding that they are accelerating away from us and each other faster ad faster.

Hence... the space betweeen galaxies is getting bigger and bigger...

And currently Astronomers (Plus, by extension 'Us') do not currently know why.

Hence the hanging of the current label 'Dark Energy' to said phenomenon (Do-doo, De do-do!) untill Astronomers etc actually do figure out what is going on?

B) That the rotational speed of the outer edges of galaxies that we can observe (And have been observing for quite a few decades now) is/are such that that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating as they do and hence something must be going on to prevent said physical thing happening.

And currently Astronomers do not currently know why.

Which again leads Astronomers to hang the label 'Dark Matter' to said thing untill Astronomers actually do figure out what is going on?

I am intruiged as to your thoughts on such things M4X.

Not at work.

[Anomalocaris]

You realize that very picture is pseudoscience, right?  There is a certain extremely basic conservation of momentum thingy of which your ignorance is showing through as you brag stupidly of your supposed familiarity with the science thing.

The thing with dark matter and dark energy is sufficiently basic part of current scientific understanding of the universe no one who has any pretense to minimal interest in modern science, or indeed understand at a minimum level what science is, should demand that others explain it to them.  Even if the person was so lazy as to have never looked it up himself, he should know where to look it up and not betray a simultaneous ignorance, conceit and laziness by demanding other explain it to them.

So bozo, you don’t know what science is.  So spare us the hot and cold about “pseudo” science.

It's an illustration.  So even better if his pseudo-science is being defeated by a concept of pseudo-science.

You two both need to stop making things up.  This isn't make believe land.   Either put up or shut up if you claim something exists.

Pseudo science is all on your side, I am afraid.  There is an expectation of minimum competence in any discussion.  It is not our job to raise you up to it, especially since you lack the proper deference for your betters so your betters, namely everyone here who is not you or CDF, would be more favorably disposed towards you, and overlook your disgraceful ignorances, and help you far more than you deserve.

Figure out why dark energy and dark matter are scientifically sound hypothesis yourself.   Better yet, figure out yourself what science actually is and what is meant by facts and hypothesis in science so you have a basis for sitting at the same table, or else get the fuck out of everyone elses’ faces.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

It's an illustration.  So even better if his pseudo-science is being defeated by a concept of pseudo-science.

You two both need to stop making things up.  This isn't make believe land.   Either put up or shut up if you claim something exists.

Pseudo science is all on your side, I am afraid.  There is an expectation of minimum competence in any discussion.  It is not our job to raise you up to it, especially since you lack the proper deference for your betters so your betters, namely everyone here who is not you or CDF, would be more favorably disposed towards you, and overlook your disgraceful ignorances, and help you far more than you deserve.

Figure out why dark energy and dark matter are scientifically sound hypothesis yourself.   Better yet, figure out yourself what science actually is and what is meant by facts and hypothesis in science so you have a basis for sitting at the same table, or else get the fuck out of everyone elses’ faces.

Oh come on.  Show me a little dark matter.   I didn't say it doesn't exist.  Little ol' me is just waiting for one of you super mega scientists to show me some.

---

  .... Either put up or shut up if you claim something exists.

I.... am confused M4X.

What is it about the observation that Astronomers have made about which you seem to not accept?

That;

A) As we look farther and father away/out/back in time the more and more 'Red shifted' said images appear. Hence leading to the understanding that they are accelerating away from us and each other faster ad faster.

Hence... the space betweeen galaxies is getting bigger and bigger...

And currently Astronomers (Plus, by extension 'Us') do not currently know why.

Hence the hanging of the current label 'Dark Energy' to said phenomenon (Do-doo, De do-do!) untill Astronomers etc actually do figure out what is going on?

B) That the rotational speed of the outer edges of galaxies that we can observe (And have been observing for quite a few decades now) is/are such that that calculations show that many galaxies would fly apart instead of rotating as they do and hence something must be going on to prevent said physical thing happening.

And currently Astronomers do not currently know why.

Which again leads Astronomers to hang the label 'Dark Matter' to said thing untill Astronomers actually do figure out what is going on?

I am intruiged as to your thoughts on such things M4X.

Not at work.

My thoughts are, if you show me some in a video, photo, or even in person that can't be reasonably denied, then I'll agree with you.