Let's assume the theory of evolution is in every way incorrect. Fine. This does NOT mean that gods exist. In fact, it says nothing about the origin of the universe

1. Ad Hominen: The Banana Man is a moron and his presuppositionalism is not evidence of the existence of a god.

2. His first fallacy is "false equivalency" or "The watchmaker fallacy." He is comparing things that are designed, like books, with things that occur naturally through chemical and biological processes. What must you compare the watch to to make the judgment that it is designed? You must compare it to other things human beings have designed. You do not compare a watch to a deer, a tree, the sky, or any other living thing. Watches do not breath, eat, or even defecate. They are not natural.

3. The DNA code is not a binary system. https://www.quora.com/Is-human-DNA-binary It's not that simple. Even if you were to copy a persons DNA and create another being just like the first. It would never be exactly like the first. Get real. The idea of DNA being a binary code is descriptive and not prescriptive. The binary code idea is so children in High School can get an idea of what is going on. You don't get to call DNA intelligent, or a message, it is a process of chemical interactions.

4. Another Ad Hominem Attack: In the video you are listening to Ray Comfort, a New Zealand Christian minister and evangelist, talking about DNA. Really? What sort of idiot would get their biology from a Christian Minister?

5. Did DNA happen by Accident? No. And that does not lead us to a creator. It leads us to chemical processes. We already know that the building blocks of life can be created in a laboratory.
We do not know that a magical flying intelligent sky daddy waggled his magic fingers and produced living beings. The invention of a God is simply and effort to describe what we do not yet know with something even more beyond our ability to know; explaining a mystery with a greater mystery. There is no reason to make that leap of faith. Occam's razor.

6. Nothing created everything? A. Where is this nothing you are talking about? We have no example of nothing anywhere in the cosmos. If you assert there was nothing prior to the Big Bang (The expansion of the universe) you must bear the burden of proof and prove it. Currently Physics can not explore past Plank Time. Perhaps Ray the Banana Man Knows something we do not know. Perhaps he is just a Christian Evangelic Preacher blowing smoke out his butt and talking about things of which he knows absolutely nothing. I do not get my Physics from Evangelic Christians any more than I rely on them for Biology. B. If something can not come from nothing, where does God come from? If something can be eternal and ever lasting, why jump to God? Again the banana man attempts to explain a mystery with a greater mystery. C. Read a bit of Lawrence Kraus: Nothing is inherently unstable. Quantum mechanics requires that if we have a pure vacuum with no particles in it, particle pairs poof into existence constantly then VERY rapidly recombine and annihilate one another before the energy required for them to exist can be missed. That way, they never have to pay back that energy deficit. (Nothing is not exactly nothing.)
https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-deal-with-the-something-cannot-come-fro...

7. Richard Dawkins does not believe that in the beginning there was nothing and that nothing created everything. Even if he did believe that, why in the hell would we listen to a biologist about cosmology. The Banana Man is setting up a straw man argument so that he can knock it down. One more fallacy heaped on the pile. What Richard said is "Whatever nothing is, it's very very simple."

8. Something created everything - No. We are back to the false equivalency. Natural things are not crated. We have no evidence of this at all. You don't get to magically insert a god in that which is unknown. This is he "God of the gaps" fallacy.

9. There was a big bang in space and from that came dogs and cats and cows. Not quite. Another straw man. The Big Bang is a theory of the "Expansion of the Universe" not the "Creation of the Universe." The universe began as a hot dense mass or pushed back further to a singularity. Again we are unable to press past Plank Time as our physics breaks down. There is no way to get from something to nothing. When we look at the universe, something is always there. Pretending that the universe came from nothing and that a God was behind it all is just a God of the Gaps fallacy.

10. Time and space came into being at the point of the big bang. It is not an explosion. It is an expansion of stuff that was already there. If there was something prior to the big bang it had no time. No way to have a thought with a beginning and an end. No way to move from point A to point B/ No existence to act or be acted upon. The idea that there is nothing and then something in the nothing is self contradictory. What we have is a universe and absolutely no way at all to get to "nothing."

Anyone who gets there science from The Banana Man, deserves to live in delusion.

if you can't prove that something cannot come from nothing then how can they assert that a god created all of these? and comparing a book to a living organism is really nonsense. i know someone created that book coz there are authors and publishers that you can find at the last part of the book, addresses and names and contact numbers. that you can really meet and speak in person. or can look at wiki.

does the holy shit book have any authenticated signatures from the authors? "OH MY FUCKING GOD THERE'S NONE!!!"