Evidence for Intelligent Design-is there any?

I'm not trying to make them unbelive, they can do whatever they please as far as they don't bother me with it. However, when they claim to have evidence that we are designed, and then don't show any, they are lying, and lying's not ok with their god and all that.I just want to show them that believeing in their particular brand of god does not make it necesarry to lie about the world around you.

---

I hunt for the truth

The task here is to examine and assess evidence and arguments, not to make judgments about motivation.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

Huntard: "when they claim to have evidence that we are designed, and then don't show any, they are lying, and lying's not ok with their god and all that."
______________________________________
Tony:
Life is not some kind of on going supernatural miracle or some magical unknown phenomena. Evolutionist might think it is more closer to being so then I do.Life simply is (Occam's razor) TECHNOLOGY. Life is a machine with programming - Fully automated systems. Such Technology can be copies by mankind intelligently. Can not be copied without intelligence.Not even one protein needed for life can be created without intelligent designing engineers.You can't even shuffle a box full of supplies to "intelligently create" what only artistic hands can create.1. The cell is a machine.
2. DNA is Genetic Instructions (software).
3. Life is an illusion of all that complexity (machinery)
4. Machines (big or small) are never naturally occurring.News flash: There is no Living Matter.
There is no reproducing Matter.

Life copies itself without intelligence every day. Considering the thread title, do you know the difference between "evidence" and "assertions"?When you've sorted that out, you could consider the point that "intelligent designing engineers" are far more complex things than proteins, so that if they are a prerequisite for the formation of proteins, there would be no intelligent designers and no proteins. Therefore, they cannot be an essential requirement for protein formation on that basis alone. Natural selection doesn't shuffle randomly. There is an automatic bias towards what functions, and then towards improvements in function. All the machines that we know of are naturally occurring, including those which have naturally produced intelligent designers, and are designed by natural brains. We can witness nature changing "instructions" through mutations, with no intelligent designer involved. The ability to change instructions means the ability to make new "machines".You've made some assertions, but presented no evidence for I.D.{You can use the peek button at the bottom and the dBCodes help to the left of the reply form to see how quote boxes and other useful things work. Welcome to EvC.}

bluegenes: "Life copies itself without intelligence every day."
___________________________________________
TONY: So-called "life" can't even function without the super smart DNA programming instructions (Software - intelligence encoded).
Remove the DNA and find out how wrong you are.....

bluegenes: Natural selection doesn't shuffle randomly. There is an automatic bias towards what functions, and then towards improvements in function.
_______________________________________
TONY: There already is this thing can INTELLIGENT GENETIC INSTUCTIONS (basically smart programming. What changes you see are the result of this programming abilities to just name a few. Your lack out knowledge of programming and engineering is showing.Trying to copy the smarts of the DNA without the Programming has never been seen. It is impossible, Testable to be impossible, and is the most basic common sense logic that even a child can see that.

You're assuming an intelligence behind the "code" without presenting evidence for it. DNA has no brain, and it modifies itself randomly.Your own genome is unique, and the mutation and recombination processes that produces it can be observed to take place without any intelligent engineers being involved.There is no evidence that complex chemical processes in nature require intelligent designers.If intelligent designers like ourselves cannot exist without requiring intelligent designers, then they cannot exist. I repeat that intelligent design cannot be a prerequisite for the existence of intelligence or complexity. Work it out.The quote boxes are a very useful feature of this website.

There is so much wisdom and knowledge built right into the programming it can create, yes, even intelligently design a human. The DNA systems function like a computer. We know this because we have copied its basic design and came up with a DNA computer.So if you’re DNA systems are a molecular computer running on logic pre-programmed commands - that is all the evidence I need. Logic is not naturally occurring. Intelligent thought is not a blind random evolutionary selection.There is no evidence that anything I can do intelligently can also be copied by some non-intelligent Evolutionary process.Logic programming is only a creation of an intelligent mind.

HI Tony and welcome to EvC Forum! Even by the rather lax standards of ID, this statement makes no sense. The programming can intelligently design? Don't you mean the programmer? DNA doesn't function much like any computer that I would care to own. If you go line by line through the programme that runs your operating system, you won't find much in the way of junk code, i.e. coding that does nothing at all. Your genome on the other hand contains enormous amounts of neutral, non-coding DNA. Why would an intelligent designer include such waste? Why would they include harmful code, such as that which causes genetic disease? The problem here is that you have jumped the gun; you have declared victory for ID without ever providing evidence for the assertions upon which you appear to be basing your conclusions. How do we know that logic is not naturally occurring? You don't say, you just blindly assert this to be the case. Of course, if the evolutionary explanation for your existence is correct, then logic does occur naturally, in your highly evolved ape brain.You need to provide evidence that can differentiate between these differing explanations, evidence that favours ID and no other explanation. Just offering assertions like; is of no value as evidence for anything.Mutate and Survive

---

"The Bible is like a person, and if you torture it long enough, you can get it to say almost anything you'd like it to say." -- Rev. Dr. Francis H. Wade

No, they don't. They really don't. The only similarity I can think of is that they both using digital systems; although, even there, DNA does a lot of stuff which isn't digital too.

I didn't know that computers self-replicated, and that they could do so with modifications. Mine hasn't done it yet. No-one commanded your unique genome. And natural organs, our brains, are capable of logic. Nothing that we know of is non-natural.You still don't seem to understand the point I've made to you above. There is no point in claiming that something that appears complex to you, like DNA, requires intelligent engineers. The engineers themselves would be more complicated than their creation, so by your argument, would also require engineers, and we end up with an infinite regression of ever more complex engineers.This point illustrates that complexity and intelligence (and logic and DNA) must be able to exist without being intelligently designed.Asserting that certain things require intelligent design without explaining why is not presenting evidence for design, the requirement of this thread.

No, the programmer has left the building... There is nothing supernatural here, just bio-mechanical simplicity. All the smarts are now part of the programming instructions in the software DNA.
Why is it that one cell can single headedly create one whole human? Designer software of course!

TONY: We are talking here of a superior programmer coding automated intelligent software! Not human technology - superior technology fit for a God /great universal creator.

TONY: Do you want to bet on that one.....

Natural "software/hardware", actually. Nature can produce chemical arrangements that will "code" for specific results in the right environment. The chemical make up of a particular fluid determines the type of crystals formed in crystallization, for example.You seem to be claiming that intelligent engineering is a prerequisite for complex chemical processes in nature without presenting evidence for this. It's no use comparing the chemical "codes" in nature to our own codes. Without a natural code to produce us, we could not be designers of codes, so our codes are indirect products of DNA. You're putting the chicken before the egg!No matter how complex the DNA that produces intelligent engineers like ourselves is, we are more complex. Claiming, as you did above, that proteins require an intelligent engineer because of their complex nature means that the engineers would be too complex to exist without having a designer themselves. This applies whether the designer has left the building or not. At some point, intelligent complexity must be able to exist without requiring intelligent engineers.I'm not proving here that there cannot be or has not been intelligent design in this universe, merely that your claims do not work as evidence for it.Are you proposing an intelligent engineer who is simpler than the simplest of proteins?