Total Posts:28|Showing Posts:1-28
Jump to topic:

If You Can Read This, I Can Prove God Exists

LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2016 10:46:14 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Started to skim. Sounds like a design argument, not much more.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2016 11:04:11 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 10:46:14 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Started to skim. Sounds like a design argument, not much more.

You just skimmed it, and you feel that you are qualified to comment on it? His argument is air tight.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2016 11:17:34 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 11:04:11 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:46:14 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Started to skim. Sounds like a design argument, not much more.

You just skimmed it, and you feel that you are qualified to comment on it? His argument is air tight.

Not airtight, but I have no doubt either is his argument.

I might read it, but again, it sounds like the same old design argument.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 12:31:36 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?

Yup. Dumb it down for me. Present your best case. What I am really interested in is how it differs from the argument I proposed it was from a quick skim.

So... Let the dumbing down begin.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 12:54:18 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 12:31:36 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?

Yup. Dumb it down for me. Present your best case. What I am really interested in is how it differs from the argument I proposed it was from a quick skim.

So... Let the dumbing down begin.

OK. Let's begin with some definitions. First, there is the difference between a pattern and a plan.
Some argue that nature is capable of creating information. An example would be the formation of crystals. This is an example of a naturally occurring pattern. However, it does not contain any meaningful information.
A plan, on the other hand, is something like an architect would produce. It has all the information to build a house. It contains something called complex specified information. Such information is the result of will and intent. In other words, it can only come from a intelligent mind.
Language is another example. It contains meaning. Also, the information it contains is represented by the medium used to transmit it. But it is not the medium. Information exists independently of matter and energy. I could transmit information in many formats. Print, video, audio, even smoke signals. The medium doesn't matter. The information itself is the result of intelligence.
Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information, since it relies on chaos, or random chance. You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.

Would you agree with me, so far?
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:06:48 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 12:54:18 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:31:36 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?

Yup. Dumb it down for me. Present your best case. What I am really interested in is how it differs from the argument I proposed it was from a quick skim.

So... Let the dumbing down begin.

OK. Let's begin with some definitions. First, there is the difference between a pattern and a plan.

Fare enough, although that has little real meaning.

Some argue that nature is capable of creating information. An example would be the formation of crystals. This is an example of a naturally occurring pattern. However, it does not contain any meaningful information.

I will agree that using "information" in the common vernacular there is no "information" in a crustal.

A plan, on the other hand, is something like an architect would produce. It has all the information to build a house. It contains something called complex specified information. Such information is the result of will and intent. In other words, it can only come from a intelligent mind.

And how was I wrong about this argument? Sure is going right down the design path.

Language is another example. It contains meaning. Also, the information it contains is represented by the medium used to transmit it. But it is not the medium. Information exists independently of matter and energy. I could transmit information in many formats. Print, video, audio, even smoke signals. The medium doesn't matter. The information itself is the result of intelligence.

Sure.

Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information, since it relies on chaos, or random chance. You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.

Why? You have made the huge leap that only suits the needs of your desired outcome. Further, as you are working towards evolution, you should know that natural selection IS NOT a random process AT ALL! Mutation is random, but not the success or failure of the mutation.


Would you agree with me, so far?

No
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:18:22 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 1:06:48 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:54:18 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:31:36 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?

Yup. Dumb it down for me. Present your best case. What I am really interested in is how it differs from the argument I proposed it was from a quick skim.

So... Let the dumbing down begin.

OK. Let's begin with some definitions. First, there is the difference between a pattern and a plan.

Fare enough, although that has little real meaning.

Some argue that nature is capable of creating information. An example would be the formation of crystals. This is an example of a naturally occurring pattern. However, it does not contain any meaningful information.

I will agree that using "information" in the common vernacular there is no "information" in a crustal.

A plan, on the other hand, is something like an architect would produce. It has all the information to build a house. It contains something called complex specified information. Such information is the result of will and intent. In other words, it can only come from a intelligent mind.

And how was I wrong about this argument? Sure is going right down the design path.

Language is another example. It contains meaning. Also, the information it contains is represented by the medium used to transmit it. But it is not the medium. Information exists independently of matter and energy. I could transmit information in many formats. Print, video, audio, even smoke signals. The medium doesn't matter. The information itself is the result of intelligence.

Sure.

Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information, since it relies on chaos, or random chance. You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.

Why? You have made the huge leap that only suits the needs of your desired outcome. Further, as you are working towards evolution, you should know that natural selection IS NOT a random process AT ALL! Mutation is random, but not the success or failure of the mutation.


Would you agree with me, so far?

No

Can you elaborate? What don't you agree with? I thought we were having a discussion.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:21:59 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 1:18:22 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 1:06:48 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:54:18 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:31:36 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?

Yup. Dumb it down for me. Present your best case. What I am really interested in is how it differs from the argument I proposed it was from a quick skim.

So... Let the dumbing down begin.

OK. Let's begin with some definitions. First, there is the difference between a pattern and a plan.

Fare enough, although that has little real meaning.

Some argue that nature is capable of creating information. An example would be the formation of crystals. This is an example of a naturally occurring pattern. However, it does not contain any meaningful information.

I will agree that using "information" in the common vernacular there is no "information" in a crustal.

A plan, on the other hand, is something like an architect would produce. It has all the information to build a house. It contains something called complex specified information. Such information is the result of will and intent. In other words, it can only come from a intelligent mind.

And how was I wrong about this argument? Sure is going right down the design path.

Language is another example. It contains meaning. Also, the information it contains is represented by the medium used to transmit it. But it is not the medium. Information exists independently of matter and energy. I could transmit information in many formats. Print, video, audio, even smoke signals. The medium doesn't matter. The information itself is the result of intelligence.

Sure.

Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information, since it relies on chaos, or random chance. You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.

Why? You have made the huge leap that only suits the needs of your desired outcome. Further, as you are working towards evolution, you should know that natural selection IS NOT a random process AT ALL! Mutation is random, but not the success or failure of the mutation.


Would you agree with me, so far?

No

Can you elaborate? What don't you agree with? I thought we were having a discussion.

Never mind. I just noticed your other replies. All I saw at first was your no.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:25:12 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 1:18:22 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 1:06:48 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:54:18 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:31:36 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:24:17 AM, TBR wrote:
At 2/29/2016 12:22:23 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/28/2016 11:21:32 PM, TBR wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Lets put it this way. I have little reason to give him much, but I am talking to you. Why don't you tell me what is compelling about his argument, or how I am wrong about my assumption of what it is.

Sorry. It doesn't work that way. This is a debate site. I presented the guys argument. It's up to YOU to try to discredit it. Once you tell me why you think he's wrong, we can discuss it.

Right. It is a debate site. You are not offering an argument, you are offering a link to someones argument, not your own.

Work harder.

In cased you didn't notice, there is not enough room to present the argument here. That's why I provided the link. I think the real reason you're dodging me is that you cannot refute his argument. Or, maybe, you simply don't understand what was posted. If you like, I can try to dumb it down a bit, so you can understand it. Would that help?

Yup. Dumb it down for me. Present your best case. What I am really interested in is how it differs from the argument I proposed it was from a quick skim.

So... Let the dumbing down begin.

OK. Let's begin with some definitions. First, there is the difference between a pattern and a plan.

Fare enough, although that has little real meaning.

Some argue that nature is capable of creating information. An example would be the formation of crystals. This is an example of a naturally occurring pattern. However, it does not contain any meaningful information.

I will agree that using "information" in the common vernacular there is no "information" in a crustal.

A plan, on the other hand, is something like an architect would produce. It has all the information to build a house. It contains something called complex specified information. Such information is the result of will and intent. In other words, it can only come from a intelligent mind.

And how was I wrong about this argument? Sure is going right down the design path.

Language is another example. It contains meaning. Also, the information it contains is represented by the medium used to transmit it. But it is not the medium. Information exists independently of matter and energy. I could transmit information in many formats. Print, video, audio, even smoke signals. The medium doesn't matter. The information itself is the result of intelligence.

Sure.

Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information, since it relies on chaos, or random chance. You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.

Why? You have made the huge leap that only suits the needs of your desired outcome. Further, as you are working towards evolution, you should know that natural selection IS NOT a random process AT ALL! Mutation is random, but not the success or failure of the mutation.


Would you agree with me, so far?

No

Can you elaborate? What don't you agree with? I thought we were having a discussion.

"Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information,"
Bare bare assertion only. I could as easy say we have proof of the opposite being true. Nature has created plenty of complex systems.

"since it relies on chaos, or random chance."
This is not true. As I said, it is either a misunderstanding of evolution, or a straw man. Evolution is not about random chance or chaos.

You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:26:31 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
"You cannot create meaningful information through random processes."

Again, since you are driving at evolution, I will say 1) it is not random and 2) you are making a bare assertion.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:34:58 AM
Posted: 9 months ago

OK. Let's begin with some definitions. First, there is the difference between a pattern and a plan.

Fare enough, although that has little real meaning.

It means everything, as I will explain later.

Some argue that nature is capable of creating information. An example would be the formation of crystals. This is an example of a naturally occurring pattern. However, it does not contain any meaningful information.

I will agree that using "information" in the common vernacular there is no "information" in a crustal.

A plan, on the other hand, is something like an architect would produce. It has all the information to build a house. It contains something called complex specified information. Such information is the result of will and intent. In other words, it can only come from a intelligent mind.

And how was I wrong about this argument? Sure is going right down the design path.

Language is another example. It contains meaning. Also, the information it contains is represented by the medium used to transmit it. But it is not the medium. Information exists independently of matter and energy. I could transmit information in many formats. Print, video, audio, even smoke signals. The medium doesn't matter. The information itself is the result of intelligence.

Sure.

Nature is not capable of creating complex specified information, since it relies on chaos, or random chance. You cannot create meaningful information through random processes.

Why? You have made the huge leap that only suits the needs of your desired outcome. Further, as you are working towards evolution, you should know that natural selection IS NOT a random process AT ALL! Mutation is random, but not the success or failure of the mutation.


Would you agree with me, so far?

No

And here I thought that you might have some small measure of intelligence. Since mutations are random, evolution is also random. It cannot select which part of the DNA to change. There is also the simple fact that random mutations cannot create meaningful information. Mutations DESTROY information. Every genetic disorder is the result of mutations. Mutations are either harmful, or at best, neutral. There is not one example of a beneficial mutation. It is beyond belief that something that is responsible for so many diseases is believed by so many to be the same process that is responsible for life.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 1:45:39 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
And here I thought that you might have some small measure of intelligence.
F**k you too.

Since mutations are random, evolution is also random.
No... You really need to have a bit of understanding of the subjects you wish to discuss.

Mutation is random, natural selection is not. Evolution is NOT random. If you find me anywhere from any reputable scientist that says natural selection is random, I will concede. You simply don't know what you are speaking about.

It cannot select which part of the DNA to change. There is also the simple fact that random mutations cannot create meaningful information. Mutations DESTROY information. Every genetic disorder is the result of mutations. Mutations are either harmful, or at best, neutral. There is not one example of a beneficial mutation. It is beyond belief that something that is responsible for so many diseases is believed by so many to be the same process that is responsible for life.

And... As I said from post one. This is just a rehash of the poor "design" argument. Just because you have a hard time accepting evolution does not equal God.

You, and the author of the link in question, started with a very bold clam. One neither of you are getting anywhere near substantiating.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 2:13:05 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 1:45:39 AM, TBR wrote:
And here I thought that you might have some small measure of intelligence.
F**k you too.

Since mutations are random, evolution is also random.
No... You really need to have a bit of understanding of the subjects you wish to discuss.

Mutation is random, natural selection is not. Evolution is NOT random. If you find me anywhere from any reputable scientist that says natural selection is random, I will concede. You simply don't know what you are speaking about.

It cannot select which part of the DNA to change. There is also the simple fact that random mutations cannot create meaningful information. Mutations DESTROY information. Every genetic disorder is the result of mutations. Mutations are either harmful, or at best, neutral. There is not one example of a beneficial mutation. It is beyond belief that something that is responsible for so many diseases is believed by so many to be the same process that is responsible for life.

And... As I said from post one. This is just a rehash of the poor "design" argument. Just because you have a hard time accepting evolution does not equal God.

You, and the author of the link in question, started with a very bold clam. One neither of you are getting anywhere near substantiating.

I asked you to read the article, but you refused. So how can we have a meaningful discussion about it? I asked you to try to refute what he wrote, yet you refuse. You ask me to explain it to you. Well, I'm done with you. Read the article. It explains it better than I can. Once you've read it, if you even do, then you can try to refute his arguments. I'm not going to waste my time, reinventing the wheel. Read the article, in it's entirety.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 2:32:45 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 2:13:05 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 1:45:39 AM, TBR wrote:
And here I thought that you might have some small measure of intelligence.
F**k you too.

Since mutations are random, evolution is also random.
No... You really need to have a bit of understanding of the subjects you wish to discuss.

Mutation is random, natural selection is not. Evolution is NOT random. If you find me anywhere from any reputable scientist that says natural selection is random, I will concede. You simply don't know what you are speaking about.

It cannot select which part of the DNA to change. There is also the simple fact that random mutations cannot create meaningful information. Mutations DESTROY information. Every genetic disorder is the result of mutations. Mutations are either harmful, or at best, neutral. There is not one example of a beneficial mutation. It is beyond belief that something that is responsible for so many diseases is believed by so many to be the same process that is responsible for life.

And... As I said from post one. This is just a rehash of the poor "design" argument. Just because you have a hard time accepting evolution does not equal God.

You, and the author of the link in question, started with a very bold clam. One neither of you are getting anywhere near substantiating.

I asked you to read the article, but you refused. So how can we have a meaningful discussion about it? I asked you to try to refute what he wrote, yet you refuse. You ask me to explain it to you. Well, I'm done with you. Read the article. It explains it better than I can. Once you've read it, if you even do, then you can try to refute his arguments. I'm not going to waste my time, reinventing the wheel. Read the article, in it's entirety.

Well, I took another swing at the article in question. It is not an argument as much as it is a long analogy - bunch of analogy's.

There is nothing new in his argument to connect complexity of nature with divinity. There is a number of general misunderstanding of evolution - and I see now where you are confusing "random" with evolution. I assure you that there is no part of evolution theory that states that natural selection is random.

Since you seem to want to halt the discussion, I will leave you with a couple concepts that I think you may not be getting elsewhere. Evolution does not have purpose, there is no goal for some "perfection". "Good enough" will get offspring to the next generation, and is generally helpful to the process of evolution. Or, put another way, this non-random process of selection can even allow for currently not advantageous adaptations to survive into subsequent generations. "New information" from evolution processes has been shown, even in our own species, if some of these mutations keep or start providing sufficient value to survival that is just that - new "information" that has fallibility, and natural selection is... well at work.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 3:12:50 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 12:28:16 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
there is not enough room to present the argument here.

Evolution and the big bang theory can each be summarised in a paragraph, but the central argument in this book cannot?

Or say rather that the OP has no interest in accountability or liability for ignorance and error, but every interest in promoting ideology at the expense and risk of the reader.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 4:07:11 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

This is the crux of the argument:

- Ideas always precede implementation, always, no exceptions.

- All languages come from a mind. No exceptions.

- There are no languages that do not come from a mind.

- So we know that DNA was designed.

- A mind designed DNA, therefore God exists.

This leads to what I call The Atheist"s Riddle:
"Show me a language that does not come from a mind."
It"s so simple and a child can understand,
but so complex no atheist can solve.


The pompous arrogance of this fallacious argument is only matched by it's deceitful contrivance. It doesn't even follow from it's false premises to it's "leaping over a tall building conclusion".

The author conflates DNA with languages, then goes on to assert that all languages come from the mind (no exceptions), hence DNA must come from the mind, therefore God exists. Absolutely ridiculous tripe that wouldn't convince a child.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 4:40:45 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 4:07:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

This is the crux of the argument:

- Ideas always precede implementation, always, no exceptions.

- All languages come from a mind. No exceptions.

- There are no languages that do not come from a mind.

- So we know that DNA was designed.

- A mind designed DNA, therefore God exists.

This leads to what I call The Atheist"s Riddle:
"Show me a language that does not come from a mind."
It"s so simple and a child can understand,
but so complex no atheist can solve.


The pompous arrogance of this fallacious argument is only matched by it's deceitful contrivance. It doesn't even follow from it's false premises to it's "leaping over a tall building conclusion".

The author conflates DNA with languages, then goes on to assert that all languages come from the mind (no exceptions), hence DNA must come from the mind, therefore God exists. Absolutely ridiculous tripe that wouldn't convince a child.

Do you know what complex specified information is? Every language has it, including DNA. So, why do you believe that DNA gets a pass? Every other form of communication is the result of intelligent minds. So is DNA. You can deny it all you like, but it's the truth. DNA contains an alphabet, Grammar and syntax. The simple fact that we can use information theory to examine it confirms that it is indeed a language. It acts just like a computer. It receives information, stores it. Acts on it, and that little molecule can reproduce an entire person. Pretty amazing for something that was nothing more than an accident. Isn't it?
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
DanneJeRusse
Posts: 12,633
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 5:17:55 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/29/2016 4:40:45 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 2/29/2016 4:07:11 AM, DanneJeRusse wrote:
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

This is the crux of the argument:

- Ideas always precede implementation, always, no exceptions.

- All languages come from a mind. No exceptions.

- There are no languages that do not come from a mind.

- So we know that DNA was designed.

- A mind designed DNA, therefore God exists.

This leads to what I call The Atheist"s Riddle:
"Show me a language that does not come from a mind."
It"s so simple and a child can understand,
but so complex no atheist can solve.


The pompous arrogance of this fallacious argument is only matched by it's deceitful contrivance. It doesn't even follow from it's false premises to it's "leaping over a tall building conclusion".

The author conflates DNA with languages, then goes on to assert that all languages come from the mind (no exceptions), hence DNA must come from the mind, therefore God exists. Absolutely ridiculous tripe that wouldn't convince a child.

Do you know what complex specified information is?

Sure, it's a nonsensical term created by the clown prince Dembski of the Discovery Institute, one of the worst organizations for disinformation and propaganda.

Every language has it, including DNA.

That's pure baloney.

So, why do you believe that DNA gets a pass?

Because DNA and languages are actually two different things.

Every other form of communication is the result of intelligent minds. So is DNA.

More baloney.

You can deny it all you like, but it's the truth.

No, it isn't the truth and you are quite ignorant about DNA to say so.

DNA contains an alphabet, Grammar and syntax. The simple fact that we can use information theory to examine it confirms that it is indeed a language.

Sorry, but you clearly have no idea what you're talking about. Go and learn something about it before spouting nonsense.

It acts just like a computer. It receives information, stores it. Acts on it, and that little molecule can reproduce an entire person. Pretty amazing for something that was nothing more than an accident. Isn't it?

DNA is not an accident.
Marrying a 6 year old and waiting until she reaches puberty and maturity before having consensual sex is better than walking up to
a stranger in a bar and proceeding to have relations with no valid proof of the intent of the person. Muhammad wins. ~ Fatihah
If they don't want to be killed then they have to subdue to the Islamic laws. - Uncung
Without God, you are lower than sh!t. ~ SpiritandTruth
Stronn
Posts: 318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 6:41:53 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

The argument from the paper (I've used numbers where the paper uses bullet points):

1. Ideas always precede implementation, always, no exceptions.
2. All languages come from a mind. No exceptions.
3. There are no languages that do not come from a mind.
4. So we know that DNA was designed.
5. A mind designed DNA, therefore God exists.

First off, this has very sloppy logical structure. For one thing, premise 1 doesn't even belong. It's unrelated to the other four premises. For another, premises 2 and 3 are identical to each other. There is no need to say the same thing twice. One could give the author the benefit of the doubt that these bullet points were not meant to constitute a formal argument, except the paper claims to show proof of god.

Premise 4 commits the fallacy of equivocation. It relies on the implied premise that DNA is a language. But DNA is not a language, at least not in the same sense as the word is used in 3 Language: A system of words or signs that people use to express thoughts and feelings to each other.

Premise 5 commits the false dilemma fallacy. A mind could be something other than God.
slo1
Posts: 4,353
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/29/2016 4:51:58 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/28/2016 10:21:29 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
I"m author of the book Industrial Ethernet published by ISA, now in its 2nd edition, and have written many dozens of magazine articles and white papers on computer networks. Now you may ask, what do computers have to do with DNA and all those endless arguments about intelligent design? Actually, a lot.
Just like all those 1"s and 0"s that make our modern world go "round, DNA is also a digital communication system. All the same formulas and communication theory that created our modern digital age apply to DNA too. In fact many methods that are commonplace in the information technology field have been adapted and applied to genetics research and the Human Genome Project.
Now, discover what our knowledge of modern communication systems now tells us about the Origins Debate.

Here is a link to the full transcript. It's pretty long, but you can read it in less than 30 minutes. You can also listen to the audio, about an hour long. Might be faster to read it, for some of you. Some really interesting stuff that no one has been able to refute.

http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Audio format
http://cosmicfingerprints.com...

Computer and information functions are an analog to dna. They are not the same thing. Information exists in all things including crystals which have to arrange their internal structure in a very specific way. Information theory does not prove anything pertaining to intelligent design.

Let me put it this way, a molecule that floats in the cell has zero "instruction" to float by the structure which zips it in to form a protein.
Stronn
Posts: 318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/3/2016 7:48:51 PM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 3/3/2016 3:47:39 PM, Deb-8-A-Bull wrote:
When's the last time you used DNA. for anything?

I'm using it right now, for everything I do. So are you.