The flaws in Intelligent design

[Subduction Zone]

Oh im going to support it, THROUGH a question first.

Which IS: whats the purpose of the nucleotides on the DNA ladder?

Once again your question cannot be answered as asked. Loaded terminology leads to circular reasoning. See if you can find a more neutral term.

 

[We Never Know]

Your words have already been twisted. No surprise there.

Are you accusing me of twisting his words? How is that possible when he replied to me?

 

[Jollybear]

Once again your question cannot be answered as asked. Loaded terminology leads to circular reasoning. See if you can find a more neutral term.

Ok, i asked dan what DNA is. He says its LIKE a cipher.

I say, ok, but what IS it, not what is it like. So, he says its a strand or molocule with chemical nucleotide bases, ATGC.

So, then i ask, ok, what is the purpose of the nucleotide bases?

Can you answer it?

Also, its good to see you took me off ignore. Good goin there.

 

[We Never Know]

Yes, the same book. But the interpretation is so different that I can't see it as the "same God".

It's a creator God. They have their version of God creating different things.
Believing in the same creator God and accusing others of being a creation but not yourself is like someone claiming they are for peace when they belong to hate groups .

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you accusing me of twisting his words? How is that possible when he replied to me?

A reply does not mean you were innocent.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, i asked dan what DNA is. He says its LIKE a cipher.

I say, ok, but what IS it, not what is it like. So, he says its a stranf or molocule with chemical nucleotide bases, ATGC.

So, then i ask, ok, what is the purpose of the nucleotide bases?

Can you answer it?

Also, its good to see you took me off ignore. Good goin there.

Then you used the loaded term "purpose". That involves an unsubstantiated assumption. A more neutral term is preferred. It won't cause you to lose an argument if your claims are correct to use appropriate terminology.. If you lose due to that it only means that your argument was flawed from the start.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's a creator God. They have their version of God creating different things.
Believing in the same creator God and accusing others of being a creation but not yourself is like someone claiming they are for peace when they belong to hate groups .

No, it is a very different interpretation of a book. Don't read too much into the same source claim.

 

[We Never Know]

A reply does not mean you were innocent.

Wow! If they are "my" words you replied to, how I'm I twisting your words in your reply. That's ridiculous.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Wow! If they are "my" words you replied to, how I'm I twisting your words in your reply. That's ridiculous.

are you even paying attention?

 

[Jollybear]

Then you used the loaded term "purpose". That involves an unsubstantiated assumption. A more neutral term is preferred. It won't cause you to lose an argument if your claims are correct to use appropriate terminology.. If you lose due to that it only means that your argument was flawed from the start.

Ok, so, what are the nucleotides ATGC for?

Hows that?

 

[We Never Know]

No, it is a very different interpretation of a book. Don't read too much into the same source claim.

Are you his dad or protector? You jumped right in in his place then even seem to have agreed with his falseness of accusing me of twisted your words when it was absolutely impossible

 

[We Never Know]

are you even paying attention?

Sure I am, are you?

I posted, you replied to me, he replied to your post to me accusing me of twisting your words.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, so, what are the nucleotides ATGC for?

Hows that?

That still implies a purpose. It would be better to ask what the result of the nucleotides is. But then you know that. When asked without inappropriate leading terminology your attempted point disappears.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sure I am, are you?

I posted, you replied to me, he replied to your post to me accusing me of twisting your words.

You failed to understand a straight forward response.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you his dad or protector? You jumped right in in his place then even seem to have agreed with his falseness of accusing me of twisted your words when it was absolutely impossible

Friend is what I am.

And to paraphrase Shakespeare, thou doth protest too much.

 

[We Never Know]

You failed to understand a straight forward response.

Let's see who is paying attention. Quote the post where I twisted your words?

 

[We Never Know]

Friend is what I am.

And to paraphrase Shakespeare, thou doth protest too much.

Well his friend, quote the post where I twisted your words as he claims.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where did their God come from? A book written by bronze age goat herders! It's all the same God though it does seem some have different versions.

This post.

 

[We Never Know]

This post.

I would not call it "the same God". The God of different Christians can be so different that one would have a difficult time calling it the same one. There are Christians that steadfastly believe in and defend the genocidal version of God in the OT and then there are others that claim those stories are metaphor at best.

Where did their God come from? A book written by bronze age goat herders! It's all the same God though it does seem some have different versions.

Where are your words twisted?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Where are your words twisted?

Right there. A different interpretation of the same source does not mean the "same God".