[angryoldfatman]

The one that tries to equate a designed entity (life) changing itself because it was designed to do that with an undersigned entity (static) changing itself into a designed entity (a broadcast signal) for no reason at all.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Well color me confused. I have no idea what argument you’re talking about.

I was ridiculing someone else’s argument as being based on circular logic, he called my rebuttal a non-sequitur, I demonstrated what a non-sequitur was in order to show him he was wrong.

I then gave him more specific information on what logical fallacy he committed in his original argument.

I can’t decipher what you’re talking about versus what I posted earlier.

[tacticalogic]

I was ridiculing someone else’s argument as being based on circular logic, he called my rebuttal a non-sequitur, I demonstrated what a non-sequitur was in order to show him he was wrong.

And failed miserably. "Non sequitur" means "it does not follow". Trying to equate fundamentally dissimilar things will not follow. Something that was explicitly defined as having been designed will be fundamentally different from something that was not. An attempt was made to equate something that was designed to something that wasn't, and predictably the claimed conclusion did not follow - hence "non-sequitur".