Has nature ever created a code?

1352 posts / 0 new
Last post
J N Vanderbilt III's picture
If you happened upon a gift

If you happened upon a gift basket on your front step, your wife would say “a human left it there “ even though you had no idea who. Would you go so far as to to say she is guilty of argumentative ignorance fallacy? This is your reasoning.

Sheldon's picture
Ffs how much time do you need

Ffs how much time do you need to look up and understand argumentum ad ignorantiam. You still can't properly spell it ffs.

What you've used in your gift basket argument is a textbook definition of Paley' s watchmaker fallacy. I look forward to you ignoring this as well.

Now what objective evidence can you demonstrate for any intelligence outside of nature? What objective evidence can you demonstrate for a code designed by anythi g supernatural.

If you claim a deity designed DNA you will need to demonstrate objective evidence for a deity, and for how it created DNA and fully explain it.

That's what the scientific theory of evolution does for the scientific fact of evolution.

...and ffs look up an argument from ignorance fallacy, and stop trying to guess what it means. It's been obvious from the start you are parroting a first cause argument you don't remotely understand, but mistakingly think is compelling evidence, and logically valid.

Dear oh dear....

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Oh And you Are playing dumb

Oh And you Are playing dumb as to not know that DNA contains assembly instructions, really?

Sheldon's picture
Where did I say this? You

Where did I say this? You really do hope about like a frog on speed.

If DNA evolved as all living things did, then how the fuck is it's evolution happenstance? This just shows yet again that creationists don't have even the most basic tenuous grasp of evolution.

Go away and learn the basic facts about evolution. You embarrass yourself with idiocy of this magnitude. Here's a clue, an unguided insentient process need not remotely rely on blind luck.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
I never said DNA evolved,you

I never said DNA evolved,you are assuming it did
In the face of knowing that assembly instructions have never been observed materializing with out intelligence. It’s your core belief and worldview that it did

arakish's picture
Wow. Just, WOW!

Wow. Just, WOW!

I think we have discovered a new level of brainless inanity.

rmfr

Sheldon's picture
" assembly instructions have

" assembly instructions have never been observed materializing with out intelligence."

What objective evidence can you demonstrate for any intelligence other what we observe in nature?

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
It’s not unlike what I think

It’s not unlike what I think about you, A brainless atheist who’s thinks that all he can see is all that there is , a short sighted fool

Sheldon's picture
"A brainless atheist who’s

"A brainless atheist who’s thinks that all he can see is all that there is , a short sighted fool"

What are you claiming exists that we can't see, and what objective evidence can you demonstrate for it?

You might want to watch the ad hominem as well, arakish's comment was directed at the inanity of your posts and not a personal remark about you, and make no mistake your posts are woefully ill informed. A level of ignorance only creationism and creationists can be relied on to produce.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Not to worry I say it w good

Not to worry I say it w good will.
By the way are you ignorant of the names he called me earlier?

Why do you assume DNA evolved,In the face of knowing that assembly instructions have never been observed materializing with out intelligence?

Sheldon's picture
"assembly instructions have

"assembly instructions have never been observed materializing with out intelligence?"

So you said, now what objective evidence can you demonstrate for any intelligence other what we observe in nature? While you're at it give some examples of these "assembly instructions" materialising out of intelligence, with objective evidence of course?

arakish's picture
@ jnv3

@ jnv3

By the way are you ignorant of the names he called me earlier?

You mean when I called you a sorry piece of shit liar? Well, you did lie about what I had said. I called you out on those lies, but you simply ignored them. Just like a Religious Absolutist.

If you do not like getting caught telling a lie, then you do not have to be here. Did any of us twist your arm and force you to come here?

Now you are the one bringing it back up while also calling Sheldon ignorant. Typical of a Religious Absolutists. We call you out, disprove your bullshit, you ain't got any leg to stand, thus you Religious Absolutists resort to violence.

rmfr

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
By the way are you ignorant

.

SecularSonOfABiscuitEater's picture
Do "assembly instructions"

Do "assembly instructions" mutate often? asking for a friend.

Sheldon's picture
The phrase was yours, not

He can't even say what objective evidence he can demonstrate for any intelligence other than what we observe in nature? or even give define accurately what he means by the term, or give some examples of these "assembly instructions" materialising out of intelligence, with even a shred of objective evidence.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Just because I cannot

Just because I cannot pinpoint the specifics of a designer of something, logic tells me that there was a designer Because instructional information requires a designer
No are you saying that DNA does not contain instructional information on how to assemble proteins?

Tin-Man's picture
Oh! Lookie-lookie! Another

Oh! Lookie-lookie! Another good spot to park this.....

Attachments

Attach Image/Video?: 

Yes
Sheldon's picture
Pinpoint? You can't offer a

Pinpoint? You can't offer a single cogent word to explain what you are claiming is dictated by logic.

"logic tells me that there was a designer Because instructional information requires a designer"

That's not logic, it's an argument from ignorance fallacy, a god of the gaps argument. By definition that is anathema to logic. If you don't know how something originated it is fallacious to make any assertion based on not knowing, and this is the very definition of argumentum ad ignorantiam. You also can't offer a shred of objective evidence for your claim, or for any deity.

"No are you saying that DNA does not contain instructional information on how to assemble proteins?"

Science does not yet fully understand how DNA originated. Are you claiming this requires a supernatural creator / designer? What objective evidence can you demonstrate for this claim? Other than an appeal to ignorance or god of the gaps fallacy?

Can you evidence even one example of something designed and created by anything supernatural?

I think we all know by now you can't, and that you are too dishonest to admit it.

arakish's picture
@ jnv3

@ jnv3

Just because I cannot pinpoint the specifics of a designer of something, logic tells me that there was a designer.

What you are calling logic is simply a lack of knowledge. Always remember this:

Religious Logic for ALL Phenomena: I, [insert name], am incapable of understanding how [insert phenomena] could have happened. Thus, [chosen deity] must have done it. — Arakish

It is also God of the Gaps Fallacy. Just because you do not possess the knowledge to understand something, does not mean "goddidit."

rmfr

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
Sounds like logic is frowned

Sounds like logic is frowned upon by you. Do you not use it in every day life? Logic and Experience tells you that if you don’t apply the brakes you going to rear end the guy ahead of you. Experience and logic tells me that a code for instructions requires is a designer. Never in anyone’s history has he come upon a code that formed w out intel, EVER.

Did you admit you don’t know how DNA was formed, ??? welcome to evolution of the gaps!

Sheldon's picture
Nothing that contains a

Nothing that contains a fallacy can be asserted as rationally true. Your are using and have been from the start, argumentum ad ignorantiam, a fallacy in informal logic. No amount of pretence will make your claim less irrational, and I know this, so who can know why you maintain this dishonest pretence?

"Never in anyone’s history has he come upon a code that formed w out intel, EVER."

How many of those designers are not human? Dear oh dear, you really must be trolling, no one is this dimwitted unless it is deliberate.

"Did you admit you don’t know how DNA was formed, ??? welcome to evolution of the gaps!"

Evolution is an objectively evidenced fact, magic wielding deities are not, and I'm sure even someone like you can see what that means. Son DNA exists in all living things, all living things evolved, design is only evidenced in natural things, and you can demonstrate no objective evidence for a deity, or any cogent explanation for how you claim your fictional deity is supposed to have created anything.

QED...

arakish's picture
I do not know if I cannot

I do not know if I cannot take any more facepalms as a result of all these brainless inane statements.

This is why I left. Damn, Sheldon, you've got patience dude.

======================================================================

@ jnv3

Formal Challenge: Either provide objective hard empirical evidence to back up your claim that DNA was formed by an intelligent entity, or admit you are spewing mental diarrhea.

And remember this: If it cannot be falsified or verified, then it is not evidence.

======================================================================

jnv3: "Did you admit you don’t know how DNA was formed"

No, but I have read some very interesting science papers that do.

rmfr

Sheldon's picture
He's hardly tested anyone's

He's hardly tested anyone's intellectual capacity with his argument from ignorance fallacy.

It's obviously something he's read and thinks is compelling because he doesn't understand it or see it's flaws.

Though the hilarity of him repeating it each time he's challenged to evidence his conclusion as if the mere repetition of it somehow validates it , is pretty funny to me.

I apologise to anyone else reading it as it must be fairly tedious, but I can tell you now unequivocally hell not come up with anything beyond his original fallacious argument. He's had weeks, and still doesn't even seem to have grasped that it's fallacious, let alone why?

I like his evolution of the gaps line, though even this isn't original, but because he assigned a straw man argument to the scientific theory in order to claim it.

Sadly creationists on the whole are none too bright.

J N Vanderbilt III's picture
You can twist your words and

You can twist your words and reasoning to suit your view as you have. You can’t bring your self to admit the obvious, that assembly instructions only exist due to intel, whatever the intel might be. It creeps you out into a panic

Sheldon's picture
Demonstrate some objecrive

Demonstrate some objecrive evidence for a single code created by intelligence outside of the natural material world?

Your obfuscation is pitiful to watch.

Old man shouts at clouds's picture
@ JN#

@ JN#

I've followed every post on this thread...you cannot just keep repeating yourself in the face of overwhelming evidence and logic to the contrary. That shows a completely closed mind, or you are in line for the Nobel Prize for stupid.

Cognostic's picture
J N Vanderbilt III: "that

J N Vanderbilt III: "that assembly instructions only exist due to intel," 400 posts, hundreds of references to scientific papers laden with actual facts, and a rose is a rose is a rose by any other name. I'm reminded of the Bart Simpson T-shirt, "Ignorant and proud of it."

Sheldon's picture
They are proud of it. The

They are proud of it. The bible and religions have condemned and offered stark warnings against learning for its own sake for centuries.

Creationists can only maintain belief by denying scientific fact as well evidenced as the profundity of the earth. Willful proud ignorance is the only way this can be achieved.

Though one wonders why he's risk bringing his verbiage here? Misplaced confidence in his superstition is one thing, but if he didn't know before, he must know by now that the atheists here won't find such moronic vapid repetition compelling.

Lying for Jesus maybe? I've seen this phenomenon before.

Sheldon's picture
Science may not know exactly

Science may not know exactly how DNA evolved or originated. However it is a scientific fact that all living things evolved, and that all living things contain DNA.

No objective evidence has ever been demonstrated for any deity, and it is an axiomatic fact that humans have always created fictional deities. Nor has anyone ever demonstrated any objective empirical evidence for anything supernatural.

Trying to insist they can insert an unevidenced deity into the gap in our scientific understanding of things like DNA is manifestly an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Just as rat spit's using the same appeal to ignorance fallacy to try and claim that our thoughts don't originate from our brains, but from a completely unevidenced supernatural source he can't even properly define, let alone explain.

Both of them are making an assertion based on something we don't fully understand, argumentum ad ignorantiam fallacies as we know do this to try and reverse the burden of proof.

QED...it seems to a current trend among religious apologists to try and demand that those who don't share their beliefs somehow evidence the non existence of a deity. This is not only fallacious, it's absurd...

Sapporo's picture
@J N Vanderbilt III is like

@J N Vanderbilt III is like the Romans who presumed that black swans didn't exist, because all the swans they had seen were white.

Pages

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.