The stumbling block for atheists.

[Kylie]

The same could be said for your coffee cup. Coffee cups are made of the very same exact elements that exist on Earth. It would make more sense if the coffee cup developed "naturally", and ultimately it *was* created by "natural" living beings. The actual coffee cup however did require an "intelligent design". The same might be true of first forms of DNA, even if they formed "naturally".

Such as what? Explain in detail how there are things in a coffee mug which make the most sense by saying they arose naturally. You say, for example, that coffee mugs are made of the same elements that exist on Earth. Well of course, we don't mine the moon to make coffee mugs. But are you saying that, through purely naturalistic processes, metal removed the impurities from itself, formed itself into a specific shape, while crude oil refined itself, made plastic to form a lid complete with a little sliding bit to prevent spills? And another piece of crude oil refined itself into plastic to form a handle? Explain to me how you reach this conclusion, because I frankly don't see it.

 

[Radrook]

Such as what? Explain in detail how there are things in a coffee mug which make the most sense by saying they arose naturally. You say, for example, that coffee mugs are made of the same elements that exist on Earth. Well of course, we don't mine the moon to make coffee mugs. But are you saying that, through purely naturalistic processes, metal removed the impurities from itself, formed itself into a specific shape, while crude oil refined itself, made plastic to form a lid complete with a little sliding bit to prevent spills? And another piece of crude oil refined itself into plastic to form a handle? Explain to me how you reach this conclusion, because I frankly don't see it.

But you can see how DNA can via purely naturalistic means program itself to produce a brain? Perceive that it needs self repair and provide for that self repair to take place? LOLWROF!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So how do we know that DNA wasn't "intelligently designed'? We still can't build such machines from scratch in the lab even with our "intelligence".

Seriously?

Asking about excluding a negative, and pointing towards general ignorance on the matter to push the point through?

Come on, now...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

But you can see how DNA can via purely naturalistic means program itself to produce a brain? Perceive that it needs self repair and provide for that self repair to take place? LOLWROF!

The processes that make DNA develop are actually quite well understood, unlike the imaginary processes that naturally make teacups form.

 

[Radrook]

The processes that make DNA develop are actually quite well understood, unlike the imaginary processes that naturally make teacups form.

So how did the DNA KNOW that it would need upkeep and repair?

DNA repair - Wikipedia

 

[Kylie]

But you can see how DNA can via purely naturalistic means program itself to produce a brain? Perceive that it needs self repair and provide for that self repair to take place? LOLWROF!

You wouldn't be using the argument from incredulity, would you? "I can't conceive of any way that a brain can arise by naturalistic means, therefore it didn't!"

Logical fallacy, try again!

 

[quatona]

So how did the DNA KNOW that it would need upkeep and repair?

God told her so?

 

[Radrook]

God told her so?

How does it know that it needs self-repair and where does the info for the establishment of the process for self-repair originate? Dah Carmichaels did it?

 

[KCfromNC]

How does it know that it needs self-repair

It doesn't.

and where does the info for the establishment of the process for self-repair originate?

Mutation, recombination and so on.

 

[quatona]

How does it know that it needs self-repair

Are you - contrary to science - assuming that DNA is a conscious entity? That would explain why you ask such a question.

 

[Radrook]

Are you - contrary to science - assuming that DNA is a conscious entity? That would explain why you ask such a question.

The ones that seem to be assuming some kind of mysterious ability for chemicals to plan based on foresight are atheists. Furthermore you aren't answering the question. How did the DNA know that it had to make a way to repair itself continuously. If it didn't know, as you say it didn't, then why did it come up with a plan to do so? You see, everything about it indicates planning and mind and your refusal to admit it smacks of feigned irrationality to avoid the obvious. If not-explain it to me in detail.

 

[quatona]

The ones that seem to be assuming some kind of mysterious ability for chemicals to plan based on foresight are atheists.

Good thing you used the qualifier "seem to" - so I know early it´s pointless to ask for quotes or citations in order to support your assertion.

Furthermore you aren't answering the question. How did the DNA know that it had to make a way to repair itself continuously.

Of course I didn´t answer the question - I pointed out how it is based on a premise that I don´t share: that DNA is a conscious entity.

If it didn't know, as you say it didn't, then why did it come up with a plan to do so?

You are invited to show that DNA is a conscious entity and has and pursues plans. As soon as you have done that we can discuss these plans. Until then, no.

You see, everything about it indicates planning and mind and your refusal to admit it smacks of feigned irrationality to avoid the obvious.

Spare me the empty rhethoric and the ad hominems, will you?

 

[HitchSlap]

The ones that seem to be assuming some kind of mysterious ability for chemicals to plan based on foresight are atheists. Furthermore you aren't answering the question. How did the DNA know that it had to make a way to repair itself continuously. If it didn't know, as you say it didn't, then why did it come up with a plan to do so? You see, everything about it indicates planning and mind and your refusal to admit it smacks of feigned irrationality to avoid the obvious. If not-explain it to me in detail.

Argument from incredulity.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So how did the DNA KNOW that it would need upkeep and repair?

DNA repair - Wikipedia

There's no "knowing" involved.

 

[Radrook]

There's no "knowing" involved.

Then explain in detail how it happened that way without a mind.

 

[Radrook]

Argument from incredulity.

Argument from rational reason. I could very well tag the opposite argument that claims such a sequence of events as a mindless process as an Argument from Insanity. Also, if indeed you know how matter could go about mindlessly showing what appears to be forethought and planning-then describe in clear detail how it happened. I'm listening. Go ahead!

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Then explain in detail how it happened that way without a mind.

I don't have the time nore the energy to give you a crashcourse in high school biology.

In any case, I don't have to, because you're just setting up a false dichotomy.
So for the purpose of the argument, let's just say that I don't have a clue how it came about or how the simple process of evolution works.

That doesn't add a tiny speck of credibility of your claims that DNA has to be conscious entity that "thinks" or "knows" things.
DNA is just a molecule.

My ability or inability to explain how DNA develops, is irrelevant to your own claims.
Unless you like arguments from incredulity/ignorance, off course.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Argument from rational reason

When your argument amounts to nothing more or less then "I don't understand/know how it happened naturally, therefor it didn't", then that's a textbook example of the argument from incredulity/ignorance.

I could very well tag the opposite argument that claims such a sequence of events as a mindless process as an Argument from Insanity

And you'ld be wrong. And ironically, that would actually simply further extend your argument from incredulity.............

Also, if indeed you know how matter could go about mindlessly showing what appears to be forethought and planning-then describe in clear detail how it happened. I'm listening. Go ahead!

Reproduce, mutate, survive, repeat.

 

[quatona]

Then explain in detail how it happened that way without a mind.

Well, it´s you who makes the assertions - so I´m looking forward to your detailed explanation how a mind designed DNA.
If that´s too hard a question for you, maybe you can start with something more simple, say: How do apples know that they have to fall off the tree in autumn?

 

[Radrook]

It doesn't.



Mutation, recombination and so on.

It doesn't? LOL! Now you are either ignorant of your own idea or else evading.
Chemistry Nobel awarded for DNA self-repair mechanisms discovery | Genetic Literacy Project

DNA repair

is a collection of processes by which a cell identifies and corrects damage to the DNA molecules that encode its genome. In human cells, both normal metabolic activities and environmental factors such as radiation can cause DNA damage, resulting in as many as 1 million individual molecular lesions per cell per day.[1] Many of these lesions cause structural damage to the DNA molecule and can alter or eliminate the cell's ability to transcribe the gene that the affected DNA encodes. Other lesions induce potentially harmful mutations in the cell's genome, which affect the survival of its daughter cells after it undergoes mitosis. As a consequence, the DNA repair process is constantly active as it responds to damage in the DNA structure. When normal repair processes fail, and when cellular apoptosis does not occur, irreparable DNA damage may occur, including double-strand breaks and DNA crosslinkages (interstrand crosslinks or ICLs
DNA repair - Wikipedia

BTW
Your response of mutation and recombination and etceteras evades the question.