Post Reply
Page 1 of 22  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22 Next
Switch to Forum Live View ORIGIN OF LIFE - Question #2 - How Did the DNA Code Originate?
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 6:23PM #1
iamachildofhis
Posts: 10,796

iama: What other coding system has existed with out intelligent design?

2. How did the DNA code originate? The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters—just as the information on this page is not a product of the chemical properties of the ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design? How did the DNA coding system arise without it being created? See: creation.com/code.

15 Questions for Evolutionists - Question 2

.
The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin
.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
.
Justice is receiving what you deserve.
Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve.
Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve.
.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 6:27PM #2
Blü
Posts: 25,190

Dan Brown invented it.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 6:27PM #3
Ken
Posts: 33,859

Mar 5, 2012 -- 6:23PM, iamachildofhis wrote:


iama: What other coding system has existed with out intelligent design?
.


I don't know. Do you?


At least you agree that DNA wasn't intelligently designed.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 6:59PM #4
MMarcoe
Posts: 17,285

Mar 5, 2012 -- 6:23PM, iamachildofhis wrote:


iama: What other coding system has existed with out intelligent design?

2. How did the DNA code originate? The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters—


There are no letters and words in the DNA code. Did you actually think there were?


just as the information on this page is not a product of the chemical properties of the ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design? How did the DNA coding system arise without it being created?


Easy. It evolved from something simpler. What don't you understand about that?



.




1. Extremists think that thinking means agreeing with them.
2. There are three sides to every story: your side, my side, and the truth.
3. God is just a personification of reality, of pure objectivity.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 7:09PM #5
Abner1
Posts: 6,438

That's abiogenesis again - a field where scientists are still studying to try to find out the answers.  "I don't know yet" is not, of course, shorthand for "Iama's version of God did it", so scientists not knowing everything is in no way a victory for your religion.


Even if scientists did know the answer, you'd just reject it anyway, right?  :)

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 8:51PM #6
iamachildofhis
Posts: 10,796


iama: Evolution believers have submitted answers to question 2.  Do you have scientific evidence in support of either the "answer" or the "rebuttal"?



2. How did the DNA code originate?


Answer 1: This is not an evolution question, because evolution starts with an already-reproducing organism.


Rebuttal: But this is something evolution must assume. Leading philosopher Antony Flew lost his atheistic faith by considering (among other things):


“It seems to me that Richard Dawkins constantly overlooks the fact that Darwin himself, in the fourteenth chapter of The Origin of Species, pointed out that his whole argument began with a being which already possessed reproductive powers. This is the creature the evolution of which a truly comprehensive theory of evolution must give some account.

“Darwin himself was well aware that he had not produced such an account. It now seems to me that the findings of more than fifty years of DNA research have provided materials for a new and enormously powerful argument to design.”2









If there’s no way for the DNA code to come about via natural processes, evolution is impossible.










If there’s no way for the DNA code to come about via natural processes, evolution is impossible. A huge problem is this: the DNA information requires complex decoding machines, including the ribosome, so it can be decoded into the specifications to build the proteins required for life, including enzymes. But the information required to build ribosomes is itself encoded on the DNA. So DNA information can’t be decoded without products of its translation, forming a ‘vicious circle’. And decoding machinery requires energy from ATP, built by ATP-synthase motors, built from instructions in the DNA decoded by ribosomes … ‘vicious circles’ for any materialistic origin theory.


Answer 2: Originally, life used RNA instead of DNA to encode information.


Rebuttal: First, where is the evidence for this, such as fossilized ancestral RNA life? Second, the RNA world hypothesis is fraught with difficulties. RNA is even less stable than DNA, and that is saying something—about a million DNA ‘letters’ are damaged in a typical cell on a good day, which then requires repair mechanisms to be in place (another problem for origin-of-life scenarios). And it is extremely unlikely that the building blocks for RNA would come about by undirected chemical interactions, and even if this happened, it would be even more improbable that the building blocks would self-assemble into any RNA molecule, let alone an informational one. And this is only the tip of the iceberg. See this article for more details, which discusses the objections of a major origin-of-life researcher to the ‘RNA world’ hypothesis.


Answer 3: It is disingenuous to argue from the current DNA code, because the original code would have been much simpler.


Rebuttal: This is most disingenuous. So many evolutionists have appealed to the common DNA code to “prove” common ancestry. But now they are claiming that the first life had a different code not possessed by any living creature! But how could we go from the hypothetical simpler coding system to the current one? It would be like switching keys on a computer keyboard—the messages would become scrambled (as anyone who is accustomed to a QWERTY keyboard who has tried to use a non-QWERTY Latin keyboard would know only too well).


Actually, it has long been known that there are exceptions to the code, as we have pointed out (see The Unity of Life) and that is a problem for evolutionists. Richard Dawkins was recently stumped when “ life-creator Craig” Venter pointed out that there were different codes—Dawkins has long taught that evolution was supported by a single code and used this to argue for the single (evolutionary, of course) origin of all life.


There is a certain minimum amount of information which would have to be encoded for any living thing to survive. Currently, the self-replicating organism with the least amount of genetic information is the Mycoplasma genitalium with 580,000 ‘letters’ coding for 482 proteins. But this can only survive as a parasite, so non-parasitical life would have to encode even more information. See How simple can life be?


Answer 4: The question of how the modern code emerged from these early predecessors is evolution itself. Random deviations in the nucleic acid structure would change the by-product produced, if the by-product was more efficient at replicating, it would overwhelm less efficient codes. This gradual change in the complexity of the underlying code is useful in explaining many aspects of biological theory. Such as why RNA is used as an intermediate between DNA and protein synthesis.


Rebuttal: Random deviations would randomly change the “by-product produced”, so they would disrupt all the proteins encoded. RNA is used as an intermediate because it is more labile; it’s optimal for the short time frames needed for cell communications. It is a hopeless candidate for hypothetical eons in a primordial soup.


Answer 5: The words ‘code’ and ‘language’ are only metaphors when applied to the DNA code, and they have no reality outside our own mental constructs. In reality, the whole thing is dependent on chemical properties.


Rebuttal: Secular scientists refer to the nucleobases of DNA as ‘letters’, so it’s hardly original to us. And we would agree that the workings of the code are due to chemical properties—we are not vitalists (see also Naturalism, Origins and Operational Science. But this doesn’t explain the origin of the code. Similarly, we believe that the workings of computer decoders can be explained totally by the laws of semi-conductor electron levels and other electrical properties, but these laws didn’t make the computer. Should we say then that there is no difference between a 500 GB hard drive and an old 2 MB one, because it has no reality outside our mind? Also, this is a rather petty thing to dispute, since it does not address any of the arguments from the pamphlet. One wonders why we received several objections of this nature.


Answer 6: It is easy to create amino acids and the building blocks for RNA by running an electrical charge through mineral-rich water.


Rebuttal: If you could actually get all the amino acids needed for life, and the sugars for RNA, from those conditions (which you can’t, since the conditions are incompatible, so this is a baseless assertion), that would be only the very first step. You then have to polymerize the amino acids in the right sequences into proteins (don’t forget about folding the proteins into precisely the right shape with chaperonins, because even one wrongly-folded protein can wreak havoc), and assemble all those proteins into micro-compartments to prevent the wrong things from reacting, then combine these compartments together to make the first cell. That is why such experiments never go beyond these simple “building blocks”; they are too dilute, contaminated, cross-reactive, and racemic (instead of being ‘one-handed’), to build anything. See Origin of life: instability of building blocks and Origin of life: the chirality problem. We have already covered the problems for the RNA world.



.

The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin
.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
.
Justice is receiving what you deserve.
Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve.
Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve.
.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 05, 2012 - 8:54PM #7
Abner1
Posts: 6,438

Wow - even when she makes seven new threads, she can't stay on-topic or say anything for herself!


I think I'm done wasting my time on this - Iama has nothing new to say.  All this has been answered already dozens of times over.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 06, 2012 - 1:19PM #8
d_p_m
Posts: 10,134

Answer: through variation and selection.

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."

― Niels Bohr



"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2012 - 4:46PM #9
iamachildofhis
Posts: 10,796

Mar 5, 2012 -- 7:09PM, Abner1 wrote:



Abner1: That's abiogenesis again - a field where scientists are still studying to try to find out the answers.  "I don't know yet" is not, of course, shorthand for "Iama's version of God did it", so scientists not knowing everything is in no way a victory for your religion.


Even if scientists did know the answer, you'd just reject it anyway, right?  :)



iama:  It is Origin of Life, again!


The genetic codes of all life-forms contain information which is non-material, and can only be derived from an intelligence source.  See the following link:


Lost in translation


The genetic information code points to an intelligent source


Origin of a code


"Atheistic evolutionists are committed to a materialistic origin of life. As such, there should be no non-material quantity to the universe. However, modern science shows us that the study of biology is largely a study of information science, as all living things contain vast libraries of information in the form of a genetic code (DNA).


So committed evolutionists must believe (for the origin of life to have occurred naturalistically) that a code system originated by chance, with no outside intelligence. But experimental science has shown this is false. Information is non-material; it is a metaphysical entity, and has only been observed to be derived from an intelligent source. An example can be demonstrated simply.


Pretend I take a piece of chalk and write a message on a blackboard; “Hi, my name is Cal”. If I asked you “Where did the information come from?” would you say “From the chalk”? If I were to rub the message off the board and show you the chalk on my hand would you say there is any information in it? No.


Obviously information was carried on the material of the chalk (because of the arrangement) but chalk has no inherent information content. The information can be traced back to the mind (me) that formulated the message, not the matter (calcium carbonate). Similarly, DNA is comprised of sugar, phosphates and bases, but the matter that it is made of does not contain the information, the arrangement of it does.


So information is 1) metaphysical (it is not a part of the matter it is carried on) and 2) only ever been observed to be created by intelligence. This is a huge challenge to the atheistic paradigm, and many atheistic evolutionists committed to their faith are aware of the challenge and trying desperately to solve it.


“To stem the growing swell of Intelligent Design intrusions, it is imperative that we provide stand-alone natural process evidence of non trivial self-organization at the edge of chaos. We must demonstrate on sound scientific grounds the formal capabilities of naturally-occurring physicodynamic complexity.”1

This evolutionary author (DL Abel) has identified what he calls the “null hypothesis” to naturalism,2 shown below.


Can we falsify any of the following null hypotheses?


Neither spontaneous combinatorial complexity nor “The Edge of Chaos” can generate:


  1. Mathematical logic
  2. Algorithmic optimization
  3. Cybernetic programming
  4. Computational halting
  5. Integrated circuits
  6. Organization (e.g., homeostatic metabolism far from equilibrium)
  7. Material symbol systems (e.g., genetics)
  8. Any goal-oriented bona fide system
  9. Language
  10. Formal function of any kind
  11. Utilitarian work"


.

The wonder of Christmas is that the God Who dwelt among us, now, can dwell within us. - Roy Lessin
.
"Father, forgive them for they know not what they do."
.
Justice is receiving what you deserve.
Mercy is NOT receiving what you deserve.
Grace is receiving what you DO NOT deserve.
.
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  Mar 08, 2012 - 4:54PM #10
d_p_m
Posts: 10,134

Mar 8, 2012 -- 4:46PM, iamachildofhis wrote:


The genetic codes of all life-forms contain information which is non-material,




No, that is totally wrong. The information is completely material. If it were not material, it would not be there, and we wouldn't see it.



Mar 8, 2012 -- 4:46PM, iamachildofhis wrote:

and can only be derived from an intelligence source.




No. We have seen how all this information can come by a process of variation and selection, driven by stochastic processes.

"If you aren't confused by quantum physics, you haven't really understood it."

― Niels Bohr



"As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality."

-- Albert Einstein
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 22  •  1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 22 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook