A few examples of evidence for design.
The genetic code. The fact that it is a code. It seems as though some evolutionists here want to say that it is non informational that it is only physical. I think the burden is on you to prove that. How do different condons code for the same amino acid? Why does the mitochondrial code differ, even though it consists of the same nucleotides?
AUA: methionine (isoleucine in nuclear DNA)
AGA: terminator (arginine in nuclear DNA)
AGG: terminator (arginine in nuclear DNA)
UGA: tryptophan (termination in nuclear DNA)
So if it is a code then I would say all codes require a mental source. Falsification would be a code that does not come from a mental source.
Irreducible complexity. It seems to me that there are two answers to this question posed by evos. One is that nothing is irreducibly complex. This would be consistent with Darwin’s falsification of his theory that nothing that could not occur by small gradual steps. So if an example such as the flagellum (numerous others) is purposed as having many individual parts that have to be complete and working in order to function it should be answered to show why it is not IC. How mutation and natural selection could achieve this end product. This is after all your hypothesis that nothing is IC. Under this hypothesis if something could be determined to be IC it should be considered proof of design.
The second theory advanced is that evolution can make multiple steps at once. This seems to be without merit and looks to me that it violates Darwin’s falsification. It would be beneficial for some evos here to expound on this.
Specified Complexity. A theory that states that outside of randomness and order (as a result of natural law) you are left with design. Evolutionists seem to attack Dembski but fail to offer counter evidence to show him wrong. This is the basic theory behind the SETI research. They are looking for signals that are not random (background noise) and not ordered by natural law (pulsar) what you are left with is a designed signal. If such a signal was found (doubtful) most of you would be shouting it from the roof tops. But when Dembski purposes the same thing in relation to biology you scoff and engage in ad hominem attacks. I’m not sure what Dembski lays out in regards to falsifying his claim but it seems to me that showing his theory incorrect would be simple. An example that is non random not the result of a natural law and not designed.
One more thing, the whole you need to prove God to prove design is faulty logic. Absolutely nothing would be proof for most of you. Think about it, how would eyewitness accounts work for you? (They are mistaken or liars) How about a video? (A forgery) How about a personal vision? (I need to see a psychologist) Would SETI have to prove who the designer of the signal was to prove there was a designer?
™ Version 4.2
