Author Topic: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex  (Read 7331 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline wheels5894

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2542
  • Darwins +110/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #232 on: January 27, 2014, 04:32:29 PM »
How about you, instead of insisting without evidence that DNA is a literal language in the sense of actual meaningful communication, actually provide the evidence which proves that it is a language. 

Done so. But you rejected all my explanations and links. Its your turn now to make your case.


... but where's this designer of yours? When are you going to show who it is and how it was done?
No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such that its falshood would be more miraculous than the facts it endeavours to establish. (David Hume)

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6722
  • Darwins +897/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #233 on: January 27, 2014, 04:56:59 PM »
It is interesting that this complex DNA code left by the Intelligent Designer could not be discovered and "read" until evolutionary theory predicted the existence of DNA. And DNA shows no connection whatsoever to Christianity or any other religion. What the eff is up with that? So the Intelligent Designer could stay hidden a while longer?

It is almost as if the Intelligent Designer, who left all those fossils for scientists to find, also wanted there to be a curious Charles Darwin, a Beagle voyage through the tropics, a theory of evolution and the subsequent field of genetics. So scientists could eventually find that secret code hidden in the DNA by the mysterious Intelligent Designer.[1]   :? ;D
 1. Anyone believe that, I know a displaced Nigerian prince who needs your bank routing numbers.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4937
  • Darwins +563/-17
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #234 on: January 27, 2014, 05:05:56 PM »
Done so. But you rejected all my explanations and links. Its your turn now to make your case.
No, you haven't done so.  All you've done is regurgitate snippets from other sites that you thought supported your case.  All that accomplished was to make it evident that you were looking only for evidence which supported your existing belief.  That's not how you discover things.  You have to base your conclusions on all of the evidence available to you, and if you find evidence which contradicts what you think is true, then you need to take it into account, which means that what you think is true probably isn't.

Plus, you showed that you weren't really interested in anything I might have to say when you declined to debate me one-on-one.  Indeed, you've shown that same disregard for what other people think all along.  All that matters to you is what you believe, and 'proving' that you're right.  People have been trying to prove their beliefs that way for thousands of years, and it hasn't worked once; someone else can always come up with their own belief, and then you have positions that can't be reconciled.

That's why science is so valuable - because if you go where the evidence leads, and don't insist that things you already believed must be true, you can avoid getting stuck in that trap of self-deception.

To get back to the point, I'm okay with referring to DNA as language-like, and as code-like, because that terminology is useful for communicating with other people.  But if you want to show that it is an actual language/code, used for meaningful communication between intelligent entities, then you have to provide evidence of that.  Not simply point to human references to it as a language or a code, because that's just semantics.

Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6483
  • Darwins +771/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #235 on: January 27, 2014, 05:19:38 PM »
If one googles DNA and code, one gets hundreds of responses on both sides of the aisle about whether DNA is a code or not.

If it does qualify as a code, that doesn't prove it had an external source. Nor does DNA not being a code prove that no intelligent design was involved.

But stupid humans can turn DNA into something that is definitely code and when we do, one gram of the stuff can be used to hold 700 terabytes of data. That's 14,000 Blue-ray movies.

Note that it doesn't even have to be alive to do this. In fact, it would be dead and still stable for thousand of years, much more so than any currently available storage technology. So it is the structure, not the life that makes this possible.

But also note that using fullerenes, a two dimensional carbon based, man-made material, we may be able to store more in less space. Which would make us smarter than our so-called "intelligent designer". If fullerenes are more efficient, why weren't humans made out of one atom thick carbon? We would have worked fine. Though wind may have been problematic.

This discussion is going nowhere because both sides can find support for their POV. At least for the coding part. And of course Godexists has no trouble going to a few ID sites and finding folks who insist that the code proves that an intelligent designer (ironically, code for "god") is behind it all.

We don't have enough information yet. People one both sides are drawing very different conclusions. We'll ignore for a minute that one side is huge (science) and the other side is tiny (ID). There are two points of view. (And I'm talking the number of scientists on each side, not the number of religious adherents vs. atheists.)

Anyway, this particular line of thought is going nowhere. As one who is mostly reading the exchanges, I would appreciate it if you guys could find something more exciting to disagree about. Getting back to organelles or something else at the cellular level would offer new opportunities for name calling and such, which is apparently why we're all here anyway.





Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #236 on: January 27, 2014, 05:23:35 PM »
He's sort of like FAUX NOISE and/or a politician who takes what their opponent or those that disagree with them; what they say out of context to use against them. Here he goes to actual articles, takes specific lines that agree with his point-of-view, discards the rest and then says, "See, I used lines from the people who you admire and worship, and they agree with me!"

As if we are too stupid to notice.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #237 on: January 27, 2014, 05:31:14 PM »
, I'm okay with referring to DNA as language-like, and as code-like, because that terminology is useful for communicating with other people.

ok. So just guesswork then, and nothing to back up your claims....

awesome......

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #238 on: January 27, 2014, 05:33:31 PM »
If one googles DNA and code, one gets hundreds of responses on both sides of the aisle about whether DNA is a code or not.

If it does qualify as a code, that doesn't prove it had an external source. Nor does DNA not being a code prove that no intelligent design was involved.

But stupid humans can turn DNA into something that is definitely code and when we do, one gram of the stuff can be used to hold 700 terabytes of data. That's 14,000 Blue-ray movies.

Note that it doesn't even have to be alive to do this. In fact, it would be dead and still stable for thousand of years, much more so than any currently available storage technology. So it is the structure, not the life that makes this possible.


It seems you don't know how to differentiate between software and hardware. Can you ?

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #239 on: January 27, 2014, 05:33:59 PM »
Here he goes to actual articles, takes specific lines that agree with his point-of-view, discards the rest and then says, "See, I used lines from the people who you admire and worship, and they agree with me!"

As if we are too stupid to notice.

Sucks for him, since I don't admire any person enough to accept what they say as being true, especially if it goes against the evidence. I'm sure some (most?) of you guys feel the same way.

-Nam

-One
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #240 on: January 27, 2014, 05:34:23 PM »
It is interesting that this complex DNA code left by the Intelligent Designer could not be discovered and "read" until evolutionary theory predicted the existence of DNA.

How so ? Never heard about this.......

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2108
  • Darwins +377/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #241 on: January 27, 2014, 05:39:40 PM »
If one googles DNA and code, one gets hundreds of responses on both sides of the aisle about whether DNA is a code or not.

If it does qualify as a code, that doesn't prove it had an external source. Nor does DNA not being a code prove that no intelligent design was involved.

But stupid humans can turn DNA into something that is definitely code and when we do, one gram of the stuff can be used to hold 700 terabytes of data. That's 14,000 Blue-ray movies.

Note that it doesn't even have to be alive to do this. In fact, it would be dead and still stable for thousand of years, much more so than any currently available storage technology. So it is the structure, not the life that makes this possible.


It seems you don't know how to differentiate between software and hardware. Can you ?
I'm having a difficult time understanding how you concluded that ParkingPlaces cannot differentiate between software and hardware based upon his post.  Could you explain what makes you think he is unable to differentiate between the two?
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

- Eddie Izzard

http://deepaksducttape.wordpress.com/

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #242 on: January 27, 2014, 05:40:11 PM »
, I'm okay with referring to DNA as language-like, and as code-like, because that terminology is useful for communicating with other people.

ok. So just guesswork then, and nothing to back up your claims....

awesome......

This is what you're doing, moron.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #243 on: January 27, 2014, 05:40:53 PM »
My question was : How do you know that DNA chemical bonds do produce amino acids.
Quit playing word games.  A base triplet from a DNA strand, also known as a codon, produces an amino acid when transcribed by RNA.  That means that DNA effectively produces amino acids, which then form proteins. 

I gave you the chance to find out and correct yourself, but it seems you did not even bother to google. Of course, what you wrote , is utter bollocks. What it forms, are peptide chains.

The production of amino acids is  extremely complex , and envolves many enzymatic catalytic pathways and processes inside the cell. I am studying it , but far from understanding the complex chemical processes , which are in the most part btw. irreducible complex. The enzymatic proteins, which produce the amino acids,  are themself made of amino acids........So if cell is not all assembled at once, no amino acids, no dna, no rna, no proteins, no life.

« Last Edit: January 27, 2014, 05:43:57 PM by Godexists »

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #244 on: January 27, 2014, 05:41:34 PM »
Here he goes to actual articles, takes specific lines that agree with his point-of-view, discards the rest and then says, "See, I used lines from the people who you admire and worship, and they agree with me!"

As if we are too stupid to notice.

Sucks for him, since I don't admire any person enough to accept what they say as being true, especially if it goes against the evidence. I'm sure some (most?) of you guys feel the same way.

Of course.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #245 on: January 27, 2014, 05:46:20 PM »
, I'm okay with referring to DNA as language-like, and as code-like, because that terminology is useful for communicating with other people.

ok. So just guesswork then, and nothing to back up your claims....

awesome......

This is what you're doing, moron.

-Nam

Just reported you with moderation. Unless you are warned, i will leave.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #246 on: January 27, 2014, 06:10:46 PM »
, I'm okay with referring to DNA as language-like, and as code-like, because that terminology is useful for communicating with other people.

ok. So just guesswork then, and nothing to back up your claims....

awesome......

This is what you're doing, moron.

-Nam

Just reported you with moderation. Unless you are warned, i will leave.

Who cares? I don't. But you just made a threat to me which means I could report you for threatening me but unlike you I'm not a pussy.

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #247 on: January 27, 2014, 06:13:12 PM »
Who cares? I don't. But you just made a threat to me which means I could report you for threatening me but unlike you I'm not a pussy.

Don't feed the drama queen.

-Nam

-One
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #248 on: January 27, 2014, 06:16:28 PM »
Who cares? I don't. But you just made a threat to me which means I could report you for threatening me but unlike you I'm not a pussy.

Don't feed the drama queen.

You know I can't stand idiots. Hell, this guy whines about the stupidest things, and if he doesn't get his way he threatens you, me, anyone, staff like he owns the place.

Hey Godexists! are you Brain in disguise?

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6483
  • Darwins +771/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #249 on: January 27, 2014, 06:18:57 PM »
It seems you don't know how to differentiate between software and hardware. Can you ?

Nope. You explain it to me.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline Nam

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 12525
  • Darwins +324/-84
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm on the road less traveled...
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #250 on: January 27, 2014, 06:21:19 PM »
It seems you don't know how to differentiate between software and hardware. Can you ?

Nope. You explain it to me.

Software is really a metaphor for people with open-minds where as hardware is a metaphor for people with closed minds and hard wall-like heads.

Get it?

;)

-Nam
This thread is about lab-grown dicks, not some mincy, old, British poof of an actor. 

Let's get back on topic, please.


Offline Godexists

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 332
  • Darwins +0/-65
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
  • User posts join approval queueModerated
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #251 on: January 27, 2014, 06:28:12 PM »
Gone. I don't feed trolls.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #252 on: January 27, 2014, 06:28:34 PM »
You know I can't stand idiots.

Then I suggest you learn how to, since they make up 50% of the population. That's based solely on IQ, mind you. A study might reveal a significantly different number.

Hell, this guy whines about the stupidest things, and if he doesn't get his way he threatens you, me, anyone, staff like he owns the place.

He's never threatened me, as far as I can remember. Not that I'd care anyway.

Hey Godexists! are you Brain in disguise?

With that surname, it'd be mighty ironic.

-Nam

-One
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 11041
  • Darwins +285/-37
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #253 on: January 27, 2014, 06:29:40 PM »
Gone. I don't feed trolls.

Cannibalism is frowned upon in most societies. Yours too, I bet.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline pianodwarf

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 4366
  • Darwins +208/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Je bois ton lait frappĂ©
Re: The cell, information rich, and irreducible complex
« Reply #254 on: January 27, 2014, 06:34:29 PM »
Nam, yes, you were out of line with what you said.  Simply calling someone a moron isn't constructive or helpful in any way.  Please refrain in the future.

That having been said: for this reason and others, I think this thread is now officially unsalvageable.  I'm locking it.
[On how kangaroos could have gotten back to Australia after the flood]:  Don't kangaroos skip along the surface of the water? --Kenn