Except this has already addressed numerous times over. It's not whether or not DNA has function it's the pattern it has. But each time you always ignore the fact you're referencing evidence which doesn't even support you and that you already reject anyway for theological reasons. You can't be a YEC and use evidence supporting an old Earth to debunk evolution. You can't be an OEC and use YEC apologetics to debunk evolution either.Yeah, just like junk dna supports evolution up until it doesn't.
Well you CAN, you'd just be a liar.(shrug)
Already did. That's why Sanford (a reality denying YEC) can't explain how if everything is supposed to be suffering from "genetic entropy" due to "TEH FALL" then why the human population is currently diversifying and steadily increasing. He also can't provide us with the date of when we reach critical mass and the human genome will be no longer viable. This of course is in contradiction to both the Genesis account and Noah's Ark whereby "TEH FALL" has ALREADY happened and therefore the genome was ALREADY non-viable since Adam and Eve. Which in turn both scenarios contradict you AGAIN since both of them REQUIRE evolution at a highly-accelerated rate, contradicting your claims that evolution cannot happen and that "TEH FALL" (for which there is no mechanism by the way) is responsible for genetic entropy which would have wiped out all life on Earth. Twice. You can then get around this by claiming that Adam & Eve and Noah & Co were "special" and had a genome COMPLETELY DIFFERENT TO THAT OF ALL HUMANS ON EARTH, but then you have a slight problem in that you have zero evidence to demonstrate that they ever existed in the first place. Enter more Jewmagic.Look fu,k head. How about you try to refute Sanfords work on ch2?
You always foolishly repeat long posts even after we've addressed them.(shrug) Works on the gullible fundies around here I suppose.Oh piss off. These fools are always talking about their great posts and can never requote them.
But of course. A number of times people have posted rebuttals and you ignore them and merely re-spam stuff you've already posted. So since you're not bothering to refute them makes them irrefutable. It may be that reality may one day provide evidence that DOES, but judging by the creo track record it probably won't have anything to do with the "scientific theory" of creationism.The fact appears to be that evos shove their irrefuteable evidence at creos, and it always turns to shit. Those are the facts, and that is what you are so proud of.