Ok so here's the deal. You're trying to tell or sell me on the idea or concept that language, be it written, oral, sign etc shows no sign of Intelligence & just comes about w/o any Intelligence involved. That's what evolution sells.
Not at all.
Your YEC heroes are trying to tell you that because humans make things like computers, and that because we can sort of kind of look at DNA like a computer, therefore, DNA was made by humans.
No evolutionist says that language is not 'written' by an intelligence - we know that human intelligence is the source of everything we consider to be a language.
The problem comes in when we use the general concept of language to describe something else - like computer software or DNA activity - for simplicity. There are many people that do not grasp the subtlety of the analogies and think that they are somehow direct applications.
We use the 'language analogy' for DNA because it make sit easier for students to grasp the interactions of the molecules involved in gene expression.
We use the language analogy for computer workings for the same reason. We call writing software coding because that is what we call that activity. And we, unfortunately, also call the genetic code a code because calling it that make sit easier to understand, not.
Creationists forget that words and phrases and meanings and analogies have the meanings WE give them.
So go ahead & make your pitch & sell me on the idea, concept that communication between people, things ie computers etc don't need intelligence.
Why the strawman? Is this your defense mechanism?
Why can't creation 'science' just produce some, you know, SCIENCE that would convince skeptics that their middle eastern tales are grounded in reality? Why rely on these just-so stories and analogies and lame attempts to poke holes in evolution? Is it because these amazing scientists CANNOT find anything scientific to support their position?
Sure seems that way to me.
As a computer any of you give me your best shot. As a linguist give me your best shot. As a deaf person give me your best shot. I don't care who or what you do.
As a creationist, give your best shot at explaining how creationism explains anything.
You show me & convince me communication can be done w/o INTELLIGENCE being involved.
You mean you want us to prove that creationist analogies that rely on apparent strawman fallacies are realistic?
Isn't that YOUR job??
I can hardly wait to see these. Now I have to go take my computer & put in the shop & go out to eat with my wife. I really thank God that we all will have intelligence so we can communicate with understanding.
Now sell me how intelligence was never ever needed for any of this or these things. They just evolved per evolution.
Have a good evening.
Strawman, then a burden shifting fallacy to cover up the strawman.
Most creationists are ignorant AND lazy.
