So I went to the site that talks about the Atheist Riddle, there is a link to it right here on TA. Anyways, I must admit it is a pretty sound argument regardless of how poorly it is presented. I havent been able to find any kind of coherent argument against it or refuting it. Can anyone help? Any ideas about this? It basically states that DNA is a code, a way of storing information, and codes do not exist in nature and have always been engineered. Therefore we are engineered, they implant God as the engineer but that is simply a matter of opinion....Hmmm.
Still, for sentience/intelligence to have evolved over such a relatively short period of time is truly remarkable. I wouldn't call myself an expert, but I can't think of many adaptations as complex as sentience and linguistic abilities. Puncuated equilibrium at work I suppose, we managed to take just the right step in the right direction and it opened an entire new perception of the world to us.
So, it says that codes don't exist in nature without an intelligent creator. DNA exists in nature. If there was some other code that we found in nature, they would say that it doesn't exist in nature without intelligent creation. If we found more and more codes, at what point would they stop saying that there are no codes in nature without intelligent creation and start saying that codes are common within nature?
1) Physical matter is not created by conscious minds; there is no conscious process known to science that creates physical matter.
2) Therefore the physical universe was not created by a conscious mind.
If you can provide an empirical example of physical matter being created by a conscious mind, you've toppled my proof. All you need is one.