Not enough room in DNA

Yes, in fact, there are major differences. Biological systems are self-replicating. Most non-biological systems that I know of are not. This has serious implications, which it would be worth your time to investigate.If you're going to try to prove that you can detect design by complexity, I have a couple of questions. First, which is more indicative of design: a perfectly round, polished steel sphere exactly 20cm in diameter, or a tree? How do you know?And a second question: is the following a result of natural, unguided processes, or is it an example of intentional design? How do you know for sure?

---

I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die.
-John LydonWhat's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.
-Steven Dutch

I can think of one important one right off the bat.Self-replicating means that they build themselves without outside assistance. A tree makes more trees. Gerbils make more gerbils. Forks, laptops and gravestones never make more of themselves. That's one reason why if you find a watch in the forest you know that someone made it and it didn't grow there on its own. Or do you think that it might have grown there on its own? You're begging the question. I asked you how you know whether either one of them was designed? It can't be by complexity, as a sphere is certainly a lot less complex than a tree - it can be described in full with very little information. You're already assuming that a tree is the result of design, without saying why. It appears that you believe that some insect activity is behind these markings. I see that you're not asserting that this supposed insect itself was the designer. Instead, you're simply begging the question again, asserting that whatever this insect does is the result of its own design. Begging the question means that you're assuming that which is to be proved as your means of proving it, and it's a logical fallacy.Try again. Say you came across this in the forest: How do you know whether this is the result of unpurposed natural activities, like an insect burrowing in the wood, or if instead it's the result of intentional design, say perhaps an inscription in some unknown language?

---

I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die.
-John LydonWhat's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.
-Steven Dutch

So are you saying that the same phenomena - the marks inscribed on the tree trunk - that Calibrated thinker apparently believes are complex enough to be clear indicators of intelligent design are actually far too simple, in contrast to the workings of the cell, to be indicators of intelligent design?

---

I have no time for lies and fantasy, and neither should you. Enjoy or die.
-John LydonWhat's the difference between a conspiracy theorist and a new puppy? The puppy eventually grows up and quits whining.
-Steven Dutch