DNA Proves Existence of a Designer

[Anomalocaris]

At work.


Ah! 'Eureka'!

So..... you want me to post..... all of the research done in regards to evolution that's transpired over the last 150 years?

 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You're a hoot sometimes M4X.

You made the claim.  Not me. Should it just be assumed that you have knowledge of 150 years of research packed up inside your skull and anybody and everybody should just take your word for it?  It was a bold claim, but it doesn't do anybody any good if it can't be verified.

If, living in the 21st century, having access to 21st or late 20th century education, your skull still isn’t already filled with at least the outline and major milestones of 150 years of research since Darwin as it should, and yet you still don’t have the intelligence or diligence to address that staggering and disgraceful shortcoming on your own, then you are a lost cause in the same lementable league as CDF, as not worth noticing, much less pitying or humoring, as CDF.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

You made the claim.  Not me. Should it just be assumed that you have knowledge of 150 years of research packed up inside your skull and anybody and everybody should just take your word for it?  It was a bold claim, but it doesn't do anybody any good if it can't be verified.

If, living in the 21st century, having access to 21st or late 20th century education, your skull still isn’t already filled with at least the outline and major milestones of 150 years of research since Darwin as it should, and yet you still don’t have the intelligence or diligence to address that staggering and disgraceful shortcoming on your own, then you are a lost cause in the same lementable league as CDF, as not worth noticing, much less pitying or humoring, as CDF.

Either prove your claim, or it's just going to be assumed to be more nonsense.  Don't care about the name calling and everything else.  Doesn't bother me, and I don't see it as anything more than an adult having a temper tantrum.  If you actually had something, there would be no reason to skirt the issue.   Up to this point, it looks like you don't.  Just a bunch of "Well you're a dum dum for not listening to me", and "I have all this special knowledge and you're dumb if you don't believe me" jibber jabber.

You don't sound educated.  You sound empty.  So I call your bluff.  Time to put up or shut up.

---

At work.

You made the claim.  Not me. Should it just be assumed that you have knowledge of 150 years of research packed up inside your skull and anybody and everybody should just take your word for it?  It was a bold claim, but it doesn't do anybody any good if it can't be verified.

So..... the little bit of other corroborating information being pretty much all the science journals you might find lying about means.... what to you M4X?

Heck, I'd say my paltry, layman's understanding of a few things is but a pale shade when stood beside the towering edifice that is modern biology

Let's start here.  I don't blindly believe a word you say.  If you have something, show what it is.  If not, it's nothing.  If you claim it's there and don't show it, then your choice.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

That's fine M4X.

Though there seems to be a slight misunderstanding now between ourselves.

This thread, vast literary monument that it is, has CDF47 as its instigator.

It's CDF47's claims being touted, not mine.

My claims could be purple spotted Bottersnipes and they would have no bearing on how correct CDF47's claims are or aren't.

That's the point of contention M4X.

So, if you want to help CDF47 hold their end up M4X in this particular conversation?

That'd be right grand and good neighborly of you.

I'll be content to let CDF47 answer the question of;

"What might/would it take to falsify Inteligent Design."

Cheers mate.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

At work.

That's fine M4X.

Though there seems to be a slight misunderstanding now between ourselves.

This thread, vast literary monument that it is, has CDF47 as its instigator.

It's CDF47's claims being touted, not mine.

My claims could be purple spotted Bottersnipes and they would have no bearing on how correct CDF47's claims are or aren't.

That's the point of contention M4X.

So, if you want to help CDF47 hold their end up M4X?

That'd be right grand and good neighborly of you.

I'll be content to let CDF47 answer the question of;

"What might/would it take to falsify Inteligent  Design."

Cheers mate.

I figured it to be an open discussion.  I can't say I always agree with CDF47, but I don't always disagree with him either.  But the same is true for you.  Sometimes you are spot on with things.  It's just discussion.  But in light of the bold claim you made, I was hoping something would be made available.  If not, no prob.  Not mad about it if it's not presented.  Was just asking.  Hopefully we are all just doing our best to listen to each other and learn what we can, when we can.  If you have something valid, I'm not looking to shake my head at you and deny it.  I would want to incorporate it into what I know already.

As far as ID claims, it's not something I go out of my way to state just because I think it can stray too much from "what is believed" to "what is assumed."  I have no problem with the concept of creation, but when unknown variables are added it, then I would say I'm as equally as skeptical to believe or assert that they must be true.  Kinda like the old game "Telephone."  You start with the source, then the more you stray from it, the more you lose the authentic message.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

No worries.

Perfectly understandable if you want to step away from CDF47's unfolding leviathan of literaturic endeavor.

As for pertinant science in regards to the topic. Many good folk have provided links to such.

Follow them at your leisure.

I'm happy to await CDF47's clarifying reply. Since it will shed much light on the thread and CDF47 intentions etc.

Cheers.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

At work.

No worries.

Perfectly understandable if you want to step away from CDF47's unfolding leviathan of literaturic endeavor.

As for pertinant science in regards to the topic. Many good folk have provided links to such.

Follow them at your leisure.  

I'm happy to await CDF47's clarifying reply. Since it will shed much light on the thread and CDF47 intentions etc.

Cheers.

Thanks, but not going sort through a 1000+ pages of this to look for links.

[Peebothuhlu]

At work.

No worries.

Perfectly understandable if you want to step away from CDF47's unfolding leviathan of literaturic endeavor.

As for pertinant science in regards to the topic. Many good folk have provided links to such.

Follow them at your leisure.  

I'm happy to await CDF47's clarifying reply. Since it will shed much light on the thread and CDF47 intentions etc.

Cheers.

Thanks, but not going sort through a 1000+ pages of this to look for links.

And..... you're not thinking of stepping up to the crease so as to aid CDF47's currently rather low seeming run/batting average, then?

Didn't think the pitch was that daunting.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

At work.

Thanks, but not going sort through a 1000+ pages of this to look for links.

And..... you're not thinking of stepping up to the crease so as to aid CDF47's currently rather low seeming run/batting average, then?

Didn't think the pitch was that daunting.    

I don't think it's about batting averages, but rather what is and isn't.  I don't get too caught up in the intelligent design thing.  I believe in creation, but I think sometimes people go beyond what we know and it turns into something else.  The Bible says what it says about it, but it doesn't say everything.  To try and fill in the gaps and assume other things, you start incorporating and lot of other view points, and that tends to get more confusing than anything.  That's why I don't get all yippity yay about things like the Creation Museum.  They take one thing, building a replica ark, then they have a bunch of other things added on to it.   Some may be true, but equally so, a lot of the extras may not be.  I don't have time to assess everything and sort out all the conjecture.

[Abaddon_ire]

If, living in the 21st century, having access to 21st or late 20th century education, your skull still isn’t already filled with at least the outline and major milestones of 150 years of research since Darwin as it should, and yet you still don’t have the intelligence or diligence to address that staggering and disgraceful shortcoming on your own, then you are a lost cause in the same lementable league as CDF, as not worth noticing, much less pitying or humoring, as CDF.

Either prove your claim, or it's just going to be assumed to be more nonsense.  Don't care about the name calling and everything else.  Doesn't bother me, and I don't see it as anything more than an adult having a temper tantrum.  If you actually had something, there would be no reason to skirt the issue.   Up to this point, it looks like you don't.  Just a bunch of "Well you're a dum dum for not listening to me", and "I have all this special knowledge and you're dumb if you don't believe me" jibber jabber.

You don't sound educated.  You sound empty.  So I call your bluff.  Time to put up or shut up.

Same applies to your magic sky fairy. Prove he/she/it/housecat exists. Show me a video of your "god". Somehow, your standards of evidence apply to everyone except for you.

Are you really just another vapourware two-bit religious hypocrite?

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Either prove your claim, or it's just going to be assumed to be more nonsense.  Don't care about the name calling and everything else.  Doesn't bother me, and I don't see it as anything more than an adult having a temper tantrum.  If you actually had something, there would be no reason to skirt the issue.   Up to this point, it looks like you don't.  Just a bunch of "Well you're a dum dum for not listening to me", and "I have all this special knowledge and you're dumb if you don't believe me" jibber jabber.

You don't sound educated.  You sound empty.  So I call your bluff.  Time to put up or shut up.

Same applies to your magic sky fairy. Prove he/she/it/housecat exists. Show me a video of your "god". Somehow, your standards of evidence apply to everyone except for you.

Are you really just another vapourware two-bit religious hypocrite?

Never asserted a "magic sky fairy."  If you thought "fairy", maybe you were just looking in the mirror?

Sorry, wasn't nice, but had to say it.