With Kevin R. McCarthy (D-Texas) the Stupid Never Ends

-
Kevin is trying to refute something someone posted on his blog. Unfortunately for Kevin he obvioulsy has reading comprehension problems because he totally misses the point. The following is whay Kevin tried to refute:

Void, since computer science was one of my undergraduate degrees, I’m gonna do you a solid and answer your question. Genetic information is stored, retrieved, processed and translated by the cell just like a computer would treat digital information. Consider the following digital code: 01001000011000010010000001001000 01100001001000000100110101100001 01100100011001010010000001111001 01101111011101010010000001101100 01101111011011110110101100100001 

If you take the time to translate the above binary code, you will have used the same intelligently designed information processing that cells have used for billions of years to turn a sequence of A,C,T & G into a protein. Here are the parallels and you’ll see that they are certainly not dissimilar. hard drive = DNA bits = nucleotides bytes = codons ASCII table = codon table letters = amino acids words = proteins One of these information processing systems was intelligently designed and the other one we use every day. Which one is which? It should be easy to see why some infer ID from biochemistry.

The important part is in the beginning sentences in which the poster clearly states Genetic information is stored, retrieved, processed and translated by the cell just like a computer would treat digital information. Got that? The poster did not say that DNA was a computer nor was it like a computer. All you could take away from what was posted is that the CELL may act like a computer in some respects and those are discussed.

 The genetic code is a code. DNA is binary with each nucleotide equaling two bits of information. DNA is transcribed into RNA which is then processed and sent to a ribosome for translation into an amino acid sequence.

This is what Kevin sed:

This post talks about the old ID canard that DNA is like a computer or DNA is like computer code or DNA is like data on a hard drive. Whatever. 

Wrong! For one Dawkins said:

The machine code of the genes is uncannily computerlike.

Dawkins is not an IDist.

Kevin goes on to spew:

Make a change in a computer code and the whole thing likely crashes. 

Only if one makes random changes or the wrong change. Intelligently designed changes just modify the existing program and allows it to run with the change. Programs are modified on a daily basis and they don't all crash because of it.

Make a change in a DNA code and you might make it run better. -

Or it could be fatal.

But anyway obvious;y Kevin has reading comprehension issues as the poster talked about the cell and Kevin switched that to DNA. What a pathetically ignorant little punk Kevin is.

I wonder if he will ever deal with what the poster actually said? I say he won't because obviously he is too stupid to do so.

DNA is not like a computer- well who said that it was?

BTW Kevin, DNA doesn't fold, it coils around the histones.