Evidence for Design #2: How life began

[Seymour Flops]

This may be more evidence against Darwinism that evidence for design. But, since design was the default belief until Darwin came along, it amounts to the same thing.

Darwinian evolution requires molecules, such as RNA and DNA that reproduce themselves consistently, with occasional copying errors that are themselves reproduced, and which occasionally have genetic instructions for a trait that will be of benefit to survival and/or reproduction. Pretty powerful stuff is DNA.

So where did DNA come from under Darwin? You can't think like that! Assume the existence of DNA and then Darwinian evolution becomes understandable. One key Darwinist proponent believes that it may have been space aliens that put DNA on Earth. The rest ignore the topic completely.

Sorry, Darwiniacs! Your "theory," is dead in the water from the get-go. No DNA, no evolution. Your fully naturalistic explanation for the variety of life on Earth is either not fully naturlistic or not an explanation.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

"It just kinda sorta looks designed to me"

There, I just saved the entire world from wasting their time with this idiot thread.

Belongs in conspiracy theory section or rubber room

 

[Seymour Flops]

"It just kinda sorta looks designed to me"

There, I just saved the entire world from wasting their time with this idiot thread.

Belongs in conspiracy theory section or rubber room

A more intelligent reply would be an explanation of how DNA was first formed on Earth. Unless you agree with Richard Dawkins that it must have formed elsewhere.

But, I get that you're doing the best you can . . .

 

[Hollie]

This may be more evidence against Darwinism that evidence for design. But, since design was the default belief until Darwin came along, it amounts to the same thing.

Darwinian evolution requires molecules, such as RNA and DNA that reproduce themselves consistently, with occasional copying errors that are themselves reproduced, and which occasionally have genetic instructions for a trait that will be of benefit to survival and/or reproduction. Pretty powerful stuff is DNA.

So where did DNA come from under Darwin? You can't think like that! Assume the existence of DNA and then Darwinian evolution becomes understandable. One key Darwinist proponent believes that it may have been space aliens that put DNA on Earth. The rest ignore the topic completely.

Sorry, Darwiniacs! Your "theory," is dead in the water from the get-go. No DNA, no evolution. Your fully naturalistic explanation for the variety of life on Earth is either not fully naturlistic or not an explanation.

It's comical when the hyper-religious invent a scenario that has only one possible conclusion: ''The Gawds Did It''

Where did DNA come from under the gods? They just magically invented it?

Curious that the hyper-religious can announce with certainty that their conspiracy theories confirm the death of science and knowledge.

Who's ready to burn some old ladies at the stake? Gimme' that old-time religion.

 

[abu afak]

This may be more evidence against Darwinism that evidence for design. But, since design was the default belief until Darwin came along, it amounts to the same thing.

Darwinian evolution requires molecules, such as RNA and DNA that reproduce themselves consistently, with occasional copying errors that are themselves reproduced, and which occasionally have genetic instructions for a trait that will be of benefit to survival and/or reproduction. Pretty powerful stuff is DNA.

So where did DNA come from under Darwin? You can't think like that! Assume the existence of DNA and then Darwinian evolution becomes understandable. One key Darwinist proponent believes that it may have been space aliens that put DNA on Earth. The rest ignore the topic completely.

Sorry, Darwiniacs! Your "theory," is dead in the water from the get-go. No DNA, no evolution. Your fully naturalistic explanation for the variety of life on Earth is either not fully naturlistic or not an explanation.

NO, YOU ONGOING IDlOT/ROLLING EMBARRASSMENT.

Darwin was pre-molecular.
Darwin's was just an observation of life on earth.
Similarities and differences based on environment. (even among Finch varieties in the Galapagos based on what the food source was).

Everyone has known even from pre-biblical times that some traits were inherited.
He used that and figured it WAS adaptation based on environment that accounted for the generational differences between subspecies and species.

It seems/is like you never even had any basic sciences.
Most argue like they have:
Not you.

`

 

[Hollie]

"It just kinda sorta looks designed to me"

There, I just saved the entire world from wasting their time with this idiot thread.

Belongs in conspiracy theory section or rubber room

Yep,

The street corner proselytizing has no business in the science forum.

 

[fncceo]

One key Darwinist proponent believes that it may have been space aliens that put DNA on Earth.

Was it this guy?

 

[Seymour Flops]

NO, YOU ONGOING IDlOlT/ROLLING EMBARRASSMENT.

Darwin was pre-molecular.

"Pre-molecular?" That is completely meaningless.

Sorry, abu! I gave you another chance and you blew it.

Back to you-know-where for you.

`

 

[abu afak]

"Pre-molecular?" That is completely meaningless.

Sorry, abu! I gave you another chance and you blew it.

Back to you-know-where for you.

Embarrassing huh.
I only go on Ignore when YOU are Stumped.
Often.
LOL
When you think you've got something, you 'reply,' then still get beat.
You are SO DISHONEST.
Ignore or Don't.
Get your AMORAL act in order.
You can't.
You're a little sociopath.
`

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

Everybody is WRONG about where life came from....................

I know the TRUTH...........

 

[Ringtone]

The absurdity of the notion that protein, RNA or DNA chemically evolved prior to the cellular structures of life is only surpassed by the absurdity of the notion that life chemically evolved from nonliving material.

 

[Quasar44]

Seymour Flops
There is zero evidence for design
Zero

the human body is riddled with error after error
. We are prone to back problems, choking and hernias
. The entire human body is flawed

 

[Quasar44]

Evolution cannot create perfection it can only use what it has from previous organisms

 

[Hollie]

The absurdity of the notion that protein, RNA or DNA chemically evolved prior to the cellular structures of life is only surpassed by the absurdity of the notion that life chemically evolved from nonliving material.

The true absurdity is expecting objectivity, facts or an ethical foundation to penetrate the hyper-religionism of extremist Christians.

What we believe​

DOCTRINES AND BELIEFS
(See also “Good News”)​

(A) PRIORITIES​

1. The scientific aspects of creation are important, but are secondary in importance to the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ as Sovereign, Creator, Redeemer and Judge.
2. The doctrines of Creator and Creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

(B) BASICS​

1. The 66 books of the Bible are the written Word of God. The Bible is divinely inspired and inerrant throughout. Its assertions are factually true in all the original autographs. It is the supreme authority, not only in all matters of faith and conduct, but in everything it teaches. Its authority is not limited to spiritual, religious or redemptive themes but includes its assertions in such fields as history and science.
2. The final guide to the interpretation of Scripture is Scripture itself.
3. The account of origins presented in Genesis is a simple but factual presentation of actual events and therefore provides a reliable framework for scientific research into the question of the origin and history of life, mankind, the Earth and the universe.
4. The various original life forms (kinds), including mankind, were made by direct creative acts of God. The living descendants of any of the original kinds (apart from man) may represent more than one species today, reflecting the genetic potential within the original kind. Only limited biological changes (including mutational deterioration) have occurred naturally within each kind since Creation

This nonsense goes on but it literally screams out an impenetrable bias.

 

[Hollie]

I'm seeing a pattern here.

There are multiple ''evidence of design'' threads that offer no evidence of design. Both threads are ''evidence of ID'iot creationer failure to offer evidence of supernatural design".

Mimicking the endless ''proof of the gods", threads, these clone threads go on for multiple pages while never offering proof of gods or supernatural creationer..rers.

All of these silly threads go on for multiple pages railing against ''Darwinism'', completely ignoring the thread premise.

Total frauds.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Seymour Flops
There is zero evidence for design
Zero

the human body is riddled with error after error
. We are prone to back problems, choking and hernias
. The entire human body is flawed

Which is why I subscribe to design not "perfect design."

The appearance of design, which even Richard Dawkins agrees with, is the evidence for design. It was the default hypothesis for centuries, that the world, especially life on Earth, is so complex and worked so well, that it must have been designed.

That conclusion might be wrong, of course. But it isn't wrong just because people who are atheists want to be "intellectually fulfilled."

If you want to convince us, you need to provide evidence to show that what we see with our own eyes isnt there.

 

[Likkmee]

My life began in the back of a 48 Chrysler...but not by design

 

[Hollie]

Which is why I subscribe to design not "perfect design."

The appearance of design, which even Richard Dawkins agrees with, is the evidence for design. It was the default hypothesis for centuries, that the world, especially life on Earth, is so complex and worked so well, that it must have been designed.

That conclusion might be wrong, of course. But it isn't wrong just because people who are atheists want to be "intellectually fulfilled."

If you want to convince us, you need to provide evidence to show that what we see with our own eyes isnt there.

"appearance of design is the evidence for design"

Such are the "standard" for the hyper-religious.

Just odd that the hyper-religious can't identify any instance of supernatural design and can't identify any of their supernatural designers.

Evidence of failure is evidence of failure.

 

[james bond]

"It just kinda sorta looks designed to me"

There, I just saved the entire world from wasting their time with this idiot thread.

Belongs in conspiracy theory section or rubber room

You, atheists and their scientists are perfect for the rubber room. Do you know why they create a rubber room? I would bet our friend, abu afak, has been in one. It's easier to clean up after the asylum inmates have had their way. One infamous NY entrepreneur created one for his night club and it became popular for parties in no time.

 

[alang1216]

No DNA, no evolution.

That is the classic creationist straw man. You don't think life can exist without DNA? Why?