The Genetic Code is Indisputable Evidence for Intelligent Design
-
The genetic code is a real code- it is not a metaphor nor analogy. The genetic code is a code in the SAME sense as Morse code. The problem is codes only come from an intelligent agency. Nature cannot produce codes. If someone can demonstrate the contrary, that nature can produce codes, they will be a millionaire:
The Origin of Information: How to Solve It
To date no one has made a submission. That is because to do so requires science and materialism is the antithesis of science.
The genetic code is a real code- it is not a metaphor nor analogy. The genetic code is a code in the SAME sense as Morse code. The problem is codes only come from an intelligent agency. Nature cannot produce codes. If someone can demonstrate the contrary, that nature can produce codes, they will be a millionaire:
The Origin of Information: How to Solve It
To date no one has made a submission. That is because to do so requires science and materialism is the antithesis of science.
posted by Joe G @ 10:46 AM
16 Comments:
At 3:26 PM,
Ghostrider said…
The site you linked to defines information as
“Information” is defined as digital communication between an encoder and a decoder, using agreed upon symbols."
Having agreed upon symbols can only happen if there is an intelligence agreeing upon the symbols. So the impossible challenge is
"Show me no-intelligence information that I've defined as requiring intelligence".
There's a reason you guys are known as IDiots.
At 5:11 PM,
Joe G said…
Having agreed upon symbols can only happen if there is an intelligence agreeing upon the symbols.
That's the question, isn't it? The genetic code uses agreed upon symbols.
There is a reason you guys are known as cowardly evoTARDs.
At 5:44 PM,
Ghostrider said…
That's the question, isn't it? The genetic code uses agreed upon symbols.
No it doesn't. DNA molecules aren't symbols that abstractly represent an amino acid. DNA molecules are part of a complicated chemical reaction the end result of which is an amino acid.
Sorry, you guys are still IDiots.
At 6:46 PM,
Joe G said…
You are one ignorant dork. The DNA does not chemically become the mRNA. The mRNA does not become the amino acid. The mRNA codons represent amino acids. Biology 101, moron.
There isn't any chemical reaction in which the codons become amino acids. There isn't any physio-chemical connection between the mRNA and the amino acids.
You are sorry, and ignorant, evoTARD.
At 6:50 PM,
Joe G said…
codon:
A codon is a sequence of three DNA or RNA nucleotides that corresponds with a specific amino acid or stop signal during protein synthesis. DNA and RNA molecules are written in a language of four nucleotides; meanwhile, the language of proteins includes 20 amino acids. Codons provide the key that allows these two languages to be translated into each other. Each codon corresponds to a single amino acid (or stop signal), and the full set of codons is called the genetic code. The genetic code includes 64 possible permutations, or combinations, of three-letter nucleotide sequences that can be made from the four nucleotides. Of the 64 codons, 61 represent amino acids, and three are stop signals. For example, the codon CAG represents the amino acid glutamine, and TAA is a stop codon. The genetic code is described as degenerate, or redundant, because a single amino acid may be coded for by more than one codon. When codons are read from the nucleotide sequence, they are read in succession and do not overlap with one another.
At 6:55 PM,
Ghostrider said…
You seem to be another willfully ignorant IDiot who doesn't understand the first thing about genetics or information theory. You do have the big mouthed empty bluster part down pat though.
Let us know when you IDiots produce your first piece of positive evidence. It's been 10 years since you clowns got exposed in Kitzmiller v. Dover and you still haven't produced a single thing except bullshit.
At 7:05 PM,
Joe G said…
LoL! I just proved that you are an ignorant asshole. The genetic code is evidence for ID. It's your position that doesn't have any evidence. All you have are lying liars and ignorant assholes.
At 7:08 PM,
Ghostrider said…
Have another donut Chubs. Get your chins to stop quivering.
At 7:11 PM,
Joe G said…
LoL! I prove that you are an ignorant evoTARD and that is your response? Thank you for admitting that you are a coward.
At 10:19 PM,
bpragmatic said…
Ghostrider says:
"No it doesn't. DNA molecules aren't symbols that abstractly represent an amino acid. DNA molecules are part of a complicated chemical reaction the end result of which is an amino acid."
Goodness!!!! Why didn't I think of that before? I should be sure, since you say it happened, that chemicals were guided, by dumb uncaring and even largely "hostile" laws and frustrating environments would ARRIVE at the conglomerate of cooperative sustaining products (we can't even know the extent of at least yet) observed in living systems.
Gee whiz! "Natural Selection" must have a lot more foresight for creativity than can be shown by any "science" I have been exposed to. And I admit, that may be possible. Have no indication of that yet. Can you direct me?
Look, if you have a sufficient base of cummulative, empirically demonstrated SCIENTIFIC evidence for your assertions. Then please, publish a list on this forum for us to see.
On the other hand, if your approach to your view of "biological" or any sciences is (unscientifically) motivated by your personal views on some sort of a "creator" or even in opposition to the positions held by someone who who subscribes the such, then, to me, you are unfit to be commenting on these things. UNLESS YOU CAN SITE ADEQUATE EMPIRICAL SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR CONJECTURE. GOOD LUCK.
At 10:41 PM,
William Spearshake said…
"There isn't any chemical reaction in which the codons become amino acids. There isn't any physio-chemical connection between the mRNA and the amino acids."
Can you show me a chemical reaction where a catalyst becomes part of the produced molecule?
At 6:10 AM,
Joe G said…
Can you show me a chemical reaction where a catalyst becomes part of the produced molecule?
What does that have to do with the genetic code? The codons aren't catalysts and they do not produce amino acids.
At 9:23 PM,
William Spearshake said…
Look up the definition of catalyst Virgil. You might accidentally learn something.
At 9:41 PM,
Joe G said…
I know what a catalyst is, moron. Obviously you do not. The codons are NOT catalysts. You can't even learn something accidentally.
mRNA codons neither initiate nor speed up any chemical reactions. The ribosome is the catalyst. It is what connects the amino acids to form the polypeptide. It initiates and speeds up the reaction to produce the bonds between AAs.
The mRNA codons match up with the tRNA anti-codons. They are never involved in any chemical reactions during translation.
At 9:49 PM,
bpragmatic said…
William,
My sarcasm above set aside, can you direct me to a non speculative body of science that might directly in a relevant way empirically show that chemistry and the laws of nature are capable of the chemical-physical journey, through time, achieve such astounding discontinuities. Discontinuities that are far departures from what the immediate reaction of chemicals amongst themselves produce in relation to the development of "living systems"? It seems apparent, from scientific demonstration, that "normal", "usual", reproducible and observed chemical reactions are not, in any material way, SUFFICIENT, even if necessary, to arrive at the vast "biochemical" constituents that comprise even the simplest "living organism". So, until these kinds of things are established, how can any position of claiming the affirmative, in good conscience be made? Is it somehow, for the sake of monetary profit? To support personal philosophical preferences for emotional reasons?. Just what do you think?
At 9:52 PM,
Joe G said…
William Carpathian is still working on "catalyst". :)
Post a Comment
<< Home