Skip to comments.
Intelligent Design Found in DNA
CEH ^
| September 17, 2009
Posted on 09/17/2009 8:58:03 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Sept 17, 2009 Readers of this headline may say it is not news to say that intelligent design has been found in DNA. Others may be ready for a fight on that issue. But in this case, the design has been verified beyond any shadow of doubt. The designers are not who you may be suspecting. They are...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: byu; catholic; christian; creation; evangelical; evolution; intelligentdesign; lds; lutheran; mormon; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
To: metmom; DaveLoneRanger; editor-surveyor; betty boop; Alamo-Girl; MrB; GourmetDan; Fichori; ...
Comment #3 Removed by Moderator
To: GodGunsGuts
Researchers from BYU.
Alrighty.
4
posted on
09/17/2009 9:01:30 AM PDT
by
mgstarr
("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
To: GodGunsGuts
Intelligent design is never going to be “found” in anything, only intuited. The enormity of the design plan is bigger than the universe. It might even be bigger than the multiverse (if string theory is accurate).
If you are trying to simplify it all to a magical creation moment (or six), you will be sorely disappointed.
5
posted on
09/17/2009 9:05:42 AM PDT
by
Soothesayer
(The United States of America Rest in Peace November 4 2008)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Click the link, it’s a setup for stupidity. The letters were typed using intelligent design, so our DNA must be created the same way.
6
posted on
09/17/2009 9:05:52 AM PDT
by
Abathar
(Proudly posting without reading the article carefully since 2004)
To: GodGunsGuts
PSEUDOSCIENCE!!! It’s just a ‘trick of natue’!!! We ‘just haven’t found the mechanism yet whereby nature ‘created’ what ‘looks like’ Intelligent Design yet’!!! Heresy!!! ‘You’re just tryign to ‘sneak religion into the clasrooms’!!!
There, now that that’s out of hte way lol
7
posted on
09/17/2009 9:06:21 AM PDT
by
CottShop
(Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
To: GodGunsGuts
The source article is interesting, so what?

Kind of like saying that the carving on Mount Rushmore isn't a naturally occurring geological formation.
9
posted on
09/17/2009 9:07:18 AM PDT
by
stormer
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Thay's like saying, "If you're going to say that War and Peace was designed by an intelligence, then you might as well say that the structure of the atom proves intelligent design, because everything in the book is made from component atoms."
10
posted on
09/17/2009 9:07:35 AM PDT
by
Mr. Silverback
(They pour flaming jet fuel on people to please their god. How shall we respond?)
To: E. Pluribus Unum
Did you read the article?
PS On a serious note...from an origins standpoint, ID is the best explanation for the complex, functionally specified, digital code that is our DNA. For the only known (and therefore empirical) cause of such codes are intelligent designers. Evolution has no explanation for DNA whatsoever, as all of their attempts to find naturalistic explanations for the same have failed. As such, ID is currently the inference to the best explanation for the origin of DNA.
To: Soothesayer
Intelligent design is never going to be found in anything, only intuited. Ah, so if you find a digital watch and conclude it was designed by an intelligence, you've only intuited that? If not, why would a biological structure be any different?
If you are trying to simplify it all to a magical creation moment (or six), you will be sorely disappointed.
God is so very limited, after all.
12
posted on
09/17/2009 9:11:53 AM PDT
by
Mr. Silverback
(They pour flaming jet fuel on people to please their god. How shall we respond?)
To: Soothesayer
My cat is a big believer in string theory. Could toy with that one for hours.
13
posted on
09/17/2009 9:12:30 AM PDT
by
BipolarBob
(Yes I backed over the vampire but I swear I didn't see it in my rearview mirror.)
To: CottShop
LOL...but you do cause me to ponder an interesting point. Now that genetic engineering is coming into its own, pretty soon crime investigators will have to start learning how to detect intelligently designed DNA, for it’s only a matter of time before hi-tech criminals figure out how to forge genetic signatures!
To: E. Pluribus Unum
If you're going to say that DNA proves intelligent design, then you might as well say that the structure of the atom proves intelligent design, because all the chemical properties of the DNA molecule derive from the component atoms.
Seriously? That's your argument?
The problem of DNA absent ID is the informational properties of DNA. Put all of the atomic elements that comprise DNA together, and they will never make DNA (it's been tried ad-nauseum). Give yourself a head-start by taking individual nucleotides and mix them together, and you will get meaningless bits of DNA. Sort of like taking a million scrabble letters, randomly sequencing them and expecting to get a book chapter. It's all about the information.
15
posted on
09/17/2009 9:14:33 AM PDT
by
armydoc
Comment #16 Removed by Moderator
To: E. Pluribus Unum
If you're going to say that DNA proves intelligent design, then you might as well say that the structure of the atom proves intelligent design, because all the chemical properties of the DNA molecule derive from the component atoms. That doesn't follow. That's like saying that because you find a message in english on a beach written using rocks, the rocks must have been intelligently designed.
It is precisely because the message content of DNA is NOT a "chemical property" that we can infer intelligent design from it. If DNA message content could be shown to be merely a chemical property then the case for intelligent design of DNA would be falsified.
17
posted on
09/17/2009 9:27:13 AM PDT
by
Liberty1970
(Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
To: Soothesayer
What do you believe the “design plan” is?
18
posted on
09/17/2009 9:46:23 AM PDT
by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
To: GodGunsGuts
I’m surprised Lawyers haven’t startyed arguing for the defendendts by claiming “PSEUDOSCIENCE!!! Its just a trick of natue!!! We just havent found the mechanism yet whereby nature created what looks like an Intelligently Designed crime scene yet!!! Heresy!!! Youre just tryign to sneak religion into the Courtroom”!!!
19
posted on
09/17/2009 9:52:07 AM PDT
by
CottShop
(Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
To: metmom
Oriental Iraeli American Indians- Talk abotu an indentity crisis lol
20
posted on
09/17/2009 9:54:00 AM PDT
by
CottShop
(Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-68 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson