Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-07-2015, 01:02 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 11:07 AM)Godexists Wrote:  
(20-07-2015 07:31 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  You got one part wrong in your analogy, though.

There is no analogy here.

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/dna-at.../dna-code/

1. Code is defined as communication between an encoder (a “writer” or “speaker”) and a decoder (a “reader” or “listener”) using agreed upon symbols.
2. DNA's definition as a literal code (and not a figurative one) is nearly universal in the entire body of biological literature since the 1960's.
3. DNA code has much in common with human language and computer languages
4. DNA transcription is an encoding / decoding mechanism isomorphic with Claude Shannon's 1948 model: The sequence of base pairs is encoded into messenger RNA which is decoded into proteins.
5. Information theory terms and ideas applied to DNA are not metaphorical, but in fact quite literal in every way. In other words, the information theory argument for design is not based on analogy at all. It is direct application of mathematics to DNA, which by definition is a code.

River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life, Dawkins writes:

“…The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like. Apart from differences in jargon, the pages of a molecular biology journal might be interchanged with those of a computer engineering journal.”

Elsewhere, Dawkins writes:

“What has happened is that genetics has become a branch of information technology. The genetic code is truly digital, in exactly the same sense as computer codes. This is not some vague analogy, it is the literal truth.”


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8335231

The genetic language is a collection of rules and regularities of genetic information coding for genetic texts. It is defined by alphabet, grammar, collection of punctuation marks and regulatory sites, semantics.

What lies at the heart of every living thing is not a fire, warm breath, not a ‘spark of life’. It is information, words, instructions…Think of a billion discrete digital characters…If you want to understand life think about technology – Richard Dawkins (Dawkins 1996, 112)


http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/basics/dna

The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine ©, and thymine (T).

For the ones that deny that DNA carries literally coded information, but argue that its just metaphorically a code
. Look what Richard Dawkins has to say on the issue : See after the seventh minute:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa55s9Gs_Eg

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1281-dn...lly-a-code

Quote: It's not the letters that stick to the board, it's the letters that stick to each other. There is no board.

and how is that relevant ?

Quote:Instead of sticking 26 letters (including 2 periods) on a magnetic board, take a series of 4 letters (it's actually 64 letters, since DNA reads in groups of 3, and 4^3=64, though some code for the same letter so it's really just over 20 letters and a few punctuation marks) that stick to one another, throw a few trillion of them into a football stadium where any of them can randomly link up in as many combinations as they want, and then wade through and see if you find even one complete sentence made of your 20 letters. If you fail, try it again in one second. Then try it again, and again, and again, for about 500,000,000 years. Think you could get that sentence that way?

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1279-ab...impossible

The cell is irreducible complex, and hosts a hudge amount of codified, complex, specified information. The probability of useful DNA, RNA, or proteins occurring by chance is extremely small. Calculations vary somewhat but all are extremely small (highly improbable). If one is to assume a hypothetical prebiotic soup to start there are at least three combinational hurdles (requirements) to overcome. Each of these requirements decreases the chance of forming a workable protein. First, all amino acids must form a chemical bond (peptide bond) when joining with other amino acids in the protein chain. Assuming, for example a short protein molecule of 150 amino acids, the probability of building a 150 amino acids chain in which all linkages are peptide linkages would be roughly 1 chance in 10^45. The second requirement is that functioning proteins tolerate only left-handed amino acids, yet in abiotic amino acid production the right-handed and left-handed isomers are produced in nearly the same frequency. The probability of building a 150-amino-acid chain at random in which all bonds are peptide bonds and all amino acids are L-form is roughly 1 chance in 10^90. The third requirement for functioning proteins is that the amino acids must link up like letters in a meaningful sentence, i.e. in a functionally specified sequential arrangement. The chance for this happening at random for a 150 amino acid chain is approximately 1 chance in 10^195. It would appear impossible for chance to build even one functional protein considering how small the likelihood is. By way of comparison to get a feeling of just how low this probability is consider that there are only 10^65 atoms in our galaxy.

Of course the classic argument is given in response is that one shouldn't be surprised to find this extremely unlikely event on earth because otherwise, we wouldn't exist. Therefore, the fact that we exist means that it should only be expected by the mere fact of our own existence - not at all surprising.

However, this argument is like a situation where a man is standing before a firing squad of 1000 men with rifles who take aim and fire - - but they all miss him. According the the above logic, this man should not be at all surprised to still be alive because, if they hadn't missed him, he wouldn't be alive.

The nonsense of this line of reasoning is obvious. Surprise at the extreme odds of the genetic code and irreducible system of the cell, given the hypothesis of a mindless origin, is only to be expected - in the extreme.


Quote:It's not a car engine. It's not magnets on a board. It's certainly not a 747 in a tornado or a Swiss watch. It's chemicals that stick to each other, swirling all around the globe for millions of years of constant reactions.

Guess how many self-replicators (the sentence) had to form out of those millions of years of throwing trillions of letters into a stadium? One. Because once you had it, it replicated into two. Then four. Then eight... get the picture?

Getting your picture perfectly. And its utter nonsense to the extreme. Weeping

The architect of the code was, and is, natural selection. There is no intelligence or purpose behind it, nor is one needed.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
21-07-2015, 01:15 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
I was trying for a metaphor he'd grasp. EASY, Tiger! Tongue

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2015, 01:48 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 11:57 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  A complete lie. RNA could easily have made replication enzymes by itself, which were incorporated by DNA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25734234

Ribonucleotide reduction is the only pathway for de novo synthesis of deoxyribonucleotides in extant organisms. This chemically demanding reaction, which proceeds via a carbon-centered free radical, is catalyzed by ribonucleotide reductase (RNR). The mechanism has been deemed unlikely to be catalyzed by a ribozyme, creating an enigma regarding how the building blocks for DNA were synthesized at the transition from RNA to DNA-encoded genomes. 10

So they guys at PUBMED are liars ? Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2015, 01:48 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 01:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(21-07-2015 11:07 AM)Godexists Wrote:  There is no analogy here.

http://www.cosmicfingerprints.com/dna-at.../dna-code/

1. Code is defined as communication between an encoder (a “writer” or “speaker”) and a decoder (a “reader” or “listener”) using agreed upon symbols.
2. DNA's definition as a literal code (and not a figurative one) is nearly universal in the entire body of biological literature since the 1960's.
3. DNA code has much in common with human language and computer languages
4. DNA transcription is an encoding / decoding mechanism isomorphic with Claude Shannon's 1948 model: The sequence of base pairs is encoded into messenger RNA which is decoded into proteins.
5. Information theory terms and ideas applied to DNA are not metaphorical, but in fact quite literal in every way. In other words, the information theory argument for design is not based on analogy at all. It is direct application of mathematics to DNA, which by definition is a code.

River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life, Dawkins writes:

“…The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like. Apart from differences in jargon, the pages of a molecular biology journal might be interchanged with those of a computer engineering journal.”

Elsewhere, Dawkins writes:

“What has happened is that genetics has become a branch of information technology. The genetic code is truly digital, in exactly the same sense as computer codes. This is not some vague analogy, it is the literal truth.”


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8335231

The genetic language is a collection of rules and regularities of genetic information coding for genetic texts. It is defined by alphabet, grammar, collection of punctuation marks and regulatory sites, semantics.

What lies at the heart of every living thing is not a fire, warm breath, not a ‘spark of life’. It is information, words, instructions…Think of a billion discrete digital characters…If you want to understand life think about technology – Richard Dawkins (Dawkins 1996, 112)


http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/handbook/basics/dna

The information in DNA is stored as a code made up of four chemical bases: adenine (A), guanine (G), cytosine ©, and thymine (T).

For the ones that deny that DNA carries literally coded information, but argue that its just metaphorically a code
. Look what Richard Dawkins has to say on the issue : See after the seventh minute:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wa55s9Gs_Eg

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1281-dn...lly-a-code


and how is that relevant ?


http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1279-ab...impossible

The cell is irreducible complex, and hosts a hudge amount of codified, complex, specified information. The probability of useful DNA, RNA, or proteins occurring by chance is extremely small. Calculations vary somewhat but all are extremely small (highly improbable). If one is to assume a hypothetical prebiotic soup to start there are at least three combinational hurdles (requirements) to overcome. Each of these requirements decreases the chance of forming a workable protein. First, all amino acids must form a chemical bond (peptide bond) when joining with other amino acids in the protein chain. Assuming, for example a short protein molecule of 150 amino acids, the probability of building a 150 amino acids chain in which all linkages are peptide linkages would be roughly 1 chance in 10^45. The second requirement is that functioning proteins tolerate only left-handed amino acids, yet in abiotic amino acid production the right-handed and left-handed isomers are produced in nearly the same frequency. The probability of building a 150-amino-acid chain at random in which all bonds are peptide bonds and all amino acids are L-form is roughly 1 chance in 10^90. The third requirement for functioning proteins is that the amino acids must link up like letters in a meaningful sentence, i.e. in a functionally specified sequential arrangement. The chance for this happening at random for a 150 amino acid chain is approximately 1 chance in 10^195. It would appear impossible for chance to build even one functional protein considering how small the likelihood is. By way of comparison to get a feeling of just how low this probability is consider that there are only 10^65 atoms in our galaxy.

Of course the classic argument is given in response is that one shouldn't be surprised to find this extremely unlikely event on earth because otherwise, we wouldn't exist. Therefore, the fact that we exist means that it should only be expected by the mere fact of our own existence - not at all surprising.

However, this argument is like a situation where a man is standing before a firing squad of 1000 men with rifles who take aim and fire - - but they all miss him. According the the above logic, this man should not be at all surprised to still be alive because, if they hadn't missed him, he wouldn't be alive.

The nonsense of this line of reasoning is obvious. Surprise at the extreme odds of the genetic code and irreducible system of the cell, given the hypothesis of a mindless origin, is only to be expected - in the extreme.



Getting your picture perfectly. And its utter nonsense to the extreme. Weeping

The architect of the code was, and is, natural selection. There is no intelligence or purpose behind it, nor is one needed.

how do u know ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2015, 01:51 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 12:48 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Hey, you stupid Christard. Yeah, you.

[Image: meme_g16.png]

I'd like to see if you die without Christ, if you still will think the same on the other side...... you can live without Christ, but it will be terrible to die without him. Yes

[Image: my_mem13.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2015, 01:58 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 01:48 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(21-07-2015 11:57 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  A complete lie. RNA could easily have made replication enzymes by itself, which were incorporated by DNA.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25734234

Ribonucleotide reduction is the only pathway for de novo synthesis of deoxyribonucleotides in extant organisms. This chemically demanding reaction, which proceeds via a carbon-centered free radical, is catalyzed by ribonucleotide reductase (RNR). The mechanism has been deemed unlikely to be catalyzed by a ribozyme, creating an enigma regarding how the building blocks for DNA were synthesized at the transition from RNA to DNA-encoded genomes. 10

So they guys at PUBMED are liars ? Laugh out loadLaugh out loadLaugh out load

At least you're finally reading the serious science/scientists. That's a start.

No, they're telling the truth. That's one of the big challenges in that field right now.

What's the issue?

Do you think not being sure yet how DNA could have taken over from RNA as the coded means GODDIDIT?

More importantly, you can't read past the first two sentences? Here is the rest of that paragraph (part you quoted included) :

"Ribonucleotide reduction is the only pathway for de novo synthesis of deoxyribonucleotides in extant organisms. This chemically demanding reaction, which proceeds via a carbon-centered free radical, is catalyzed by ribonucleotide reductase (RNR). The mechanism has been deemed unlikely to be catalyzed by a ribozyme, creating an enigma regarding how the building blocks for DNA were synthesized at the transition from RNA- to DNA-encoded genomes. While it is entirely possible that a different pathway was later replaced with the modern mechanism, here we explore the evolutionary and biochemical limits for an origin of the mechanism in the RNA + protein world and suggest a model for a prototypical ribonucleotide reductase (protoRNR). From the protoRNR evolved the ancestor to modern RNRs, the urRNR, which diversified into the modern three classes. Since the initial radical generation differs between the three modern classes, it is difficult to establish how it was generated in the urRNR. Here we suggest a model that is similar to the B12-dependent mechanism in modern class II RNRs."

In other words, they're stating the problem/question, before proceeding immediately to pose a probable solution, which they invite other scientists to peer-review by testing and analysis.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RocketSurgeon76's post
21-07-2015, 02:00 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 01:48 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(21-07-2015 01:02 PM)Chas Wrote:  The architect of the code was, and is, natural selection. There is no intelligence or purpose behind it, nor is one needed.

how do u know ?

The algorithm of evolution is inevitable given replication, mutation, and selection. It is utterly mechanical and mindless.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
21-07-2015, 02:02 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
And yes, I am using Christard as an insult because you tried to use Benjamin Franklin's quote as if it supported Christianity. That makes you a Christian who is clearly retarded. A Christard.

I also call roses red, when appropriate.

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-07-2015, 02:24 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
Quote:I'd like to see if you die without Christ, if you still will think the same on the other side...... you can live without Christ, but it will be terrible to die without him. Yes

Why do christians always whip out this threat when they've lost the argument? It's the emptiest threat ever.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like xieulong's post
21-07-2015, 02:29 PM
RE: Chromosome condensation, amazing evidence of design
(21-07-2015 01:51 PM)Godexists Wrote:  I'd like to see if you die without Christ, if you still will think the same on the other side...... you can live without Christ, but it will be terrible to die without him. Yes

LOVE AND WORSHIP ME OR ILL TORTURE YOU ETERNALLY! Evil_monster
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Talviomena's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: