Random or systematic is what makes the difference

If things originated by random chance why is the DNA structure systematic. There are markers that lead and end genes. Random chance would just be hap hazard. And even the most basic bacteria contains 500,000 DNA base pairs. If you compare this to the dictionary which contains about 500,000 words it is not only like throwing the words in the air and having them all land in alphabetical order but also having the index markers in the right places. With or without belief in a Creator this is not a rational belief. Even for atheists with rational thought it seems there would have to be some kind of deliberate catalyst.

Top | Newest First | Oldest First

Northwest · M

It’s really simple. What you’re looking at, is the only combination that worked. All tte failed random combinations failed to produce life.

View 20 more replies »

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest twisting it. I said the fairy tale is believing it all popped out of nowhere. Systematic and so complex. But honestly I don't think you realize how complex

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts tte irony of your statement, even when pointed out to you, is still going over your head.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest no it's not. I know many people find religion as a fairy tale. But I already said I am not religious. But if you look at a scale and you think of which side it leans on the random answer comes up short. I am not saying what the real answer is because no one really knows. But certainly when the universe and life all show a systematic function that doesn't line up with being random. Or we would have no universal theories. Random implies hap-hazard. And the physical evidence proves it isn't that way

LeopoldBloom · M

It started with simple proteins that self-replicated, and gradually selected for more efficient forms that were often more complex.

If your explanation is goddidit, you would have to propose a mechanism whereby a disembodied intelligence can affect material reality.

View 21 more replies »

LeopoldBloom · M

@Axeroberts If you're going to propose magic as the cause, that's not a logical argument.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@LeopoldBloom you don't even read what I write do you. 🤣🤣

LeopoldBloom · M

@Axeroberts You haven't said anything substantive yet, so there's no argument to respond to.

Add a comment...