OK, I’ll amend it
Biological life has an arrangement of parts and sequence.
A mind can produce an arrangement of parts and sequence.
Therefore a mind produced biological life.
It’s still a brutally bad logic blunder. You’ve stepped on the same rake too many times to count and you still keep doing it.
This is again a misrepresentation. **Therefore a mind produced biological life is not the claim.
The claim is that a mind is a mechanism that we know can produce symbolic sequences and a system of arranged parts that performs a function.
Biology has no symbolic sequences.
No Bill that is not what you claimed about testing ID. Here is what you claimed.
If a mind designs a lawn sprinkler is that a test to see if rain clouds are Designed?
You couldn’t butcher basic logic any worse if you tried.
This is not a valid analogy.
It’s a perfectly good example of the piss poor logic you are pushing.
The fact that you do not understand the problem with the analogy tells me you don’t understand the design argument.
Comparing watering a lawn to a sequence (chemical or symbolic) being translated and performing a function is silly. I suggest you stop arguing and start trying to understand what you are arguing against.
We all understand the logical fallacy you keep blundering into Bill.
Go ahead. Walk us through the steps of how you determined when you observe a natural phenomenon, if humans can duplicate the same function then the natural phenomenon was designed by a mind.
Again, a misrepresentation. We are talking over each other at this point.
No misrepresentation. It’s you with the same logic error over and over and over and you can’t / won’t admit you screwed up royally. Of course you’ll bail from the discussion and Dory will return tomorrow with the exact same brutal logic blunder.
Really? The ID creationists have spent 20 years and millions of dollars, only in attempt to demonstrate something so patently obvious? Why?
That’s nonsense, Bill. There’s no such thing as “peptide hydrogen bonds.” The peptide bonds that link amino-acid residues (they are no longer amino acids) together in proteins are covalent bonds, not hydrogen bonds.
Random peptides make plenty of hydrogen bonds too. You don’t understand undergraduate biochemistry.
There’s no such step.
They’ve been produced, not designed. You are frantically Gish Galloping.
Closing comments for a while to give this a chance to cool down. In the meantime, ponder thoughtful replies.