 |
| |
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Sorry for the long post but I cannot seem to stay online. I will have to sign off for now. The following is relevant to the above post:
Now let’s show how this works. Let’s say there is a pile of plastic letters laying around outside. The wind blows these millions of letters around for millions of years and eventually we come on the scene and look the situation over. After searching through the confusion we eventually find a complete sentence spelled out that says, “Give this information to the DNA.” Now remember, we are a distant observer looking at things like they were in the beginning before there was life, so let’s not interject ourselves into this situation. What would a creature with no mind do with that “information”? There is no information there because there is no instructions that can be read and interpreted. No one knows what any of that means. That sentence may as well be any other random jumble of letters. It only makes sense to us but remember we are not supposed to be there. So the question is, who makes sense of it? How can anyone or anything follow these so called instructions?
Who says that a G means one thing and a U means another? Who or what decides that letters lined up to form “Give” mean anything at all? Please step back now. These questions are not for you. They are for the mindless matter and energy to figure out. What good are the letters anyway? Are they of any use at all without a mind? Why would one mindless-wonder read the order put down by another mindless-wonder? It is confusion to both. What seems so plain to us is utter confusion to that which has no mind. The DNA code came from somewhere. Where? Who decided that a T should attract an A? Who or what decided that it should be translated and interpreted one way and not another? What possible good could it do if the code was not understood and translated correctly? How could even one letter in the DNA code have any significance whatsoever without a value judgement being made?
The reason why the computer cannot design something on its own is because of value judgements that must be entered into the system by someone who has values. In other words, why is a word better than a letter? Or, why is a sentence better than a word? It seems like the word would be better at first glance because it is much more brief. Someone has to decide if the brevity is better or the more complete explanation is better. Is a tube better if it is porous and allows some of the liquid to seep through or is it better if it contains the liquid completely? Is a low electrical current better than a higher one? Is an image better than text or is text better?
The answers to the above questions may vary even within the same system. Who or what makes these decisions? In the case of a computer we can simply program it to select the color red each time it comes across it. After we do that the computer will do the work for us seemingly making the value judgements, but we all know who is behind it don’t we? The ultimate conclusion that must be drawn is that an intelligent source is behind the design regardless of what the automatic system is able to do on its own. No one seriously thinks that by turning on a switch a complicated machine comes into existence and operates without the benefit of a designer somewhere along the line.
Let’s say that all the chemicals formed magically out of stuff laying around the earth and a string of DNA formed. Now what? Is there any instructions there? Remember, I am not talking to you. What is that string of DNA except a disordered mass of confusion of no use whatsoever in telling anything or anyone what to do. It can be a string of DNA a mile long that formed itself out of the earth but it is absolutely useless, just as the ladder was that you lettered in a random manner. Now if you had known the code ahead of time then you could have made some real DNA that gave sensible instructions. Again YOU could have done that. Play this game however you like but you will find that all roads lead to intelligent life as the source of information.
You can probably make an interesting language out of snow flakes. I would suggest that you get 26 different ones and start out with an alphabet and assign different sounds to each one. Then you could devise some type of grammatical rules so that they can be formed into words and sentences. Before you know it you have a language, all from mindless snow flakes. Happy day!
Now let’s move this analogy into the body. RNA, as has been mentioned, copies various pieces of information from DNA and gets the ball rolling so that it can be used in making things. This procedure is quite complicated in real life but I will try and simplify it here. There are plenty of books on the subject and I suggest that anyone who is inclined to pass it all off as a relatively simple thing read up on it first. It is to this day not completely understood how the information in DNA gets transcribed and then translated and then put to work. Some parts are now pretty clear as to their inner workings and some are still a mystery but it seems like the major components of the cell have at least been identified as to their usual function. The ribosomes are one part that is still not entirely understood. These are an absolutely essential part and can only be described as information based machines. There are thousands of them in each cell and they are made up largely of unique structures of information carrying RNA.
Simply stated we can say that the RNA follows close behind an ordered chemical reaction that directs the DNA to open itself like a zipper does. The RNA then obtains a copy of relevant portions of the information. The relevant portion, and how that is determined is another area that is not completely understood although we already know that there are coded messages ordering the process to stop and start. Of course there are start and stop messages all through the code so there is still uncertainty as to how it all works. There is even a mechanism that double checks the copies to make sure that they are accurate.
Precisely timed release of certain chemicals causes the RNA to be cut at just the right places. In other parts of the cell these pieces are sometimes spliced back together or formed with precisely made proteins into other components. Those components help in the translation of the code that is interpreted by biological machines (ribosomes) by way of other coded instructions into the actual work of making proteins. These unique proteins are manufactured according to the strict instructions from a selection of 20 amino acids which themselves provide an endless possibility of combinations similar to the possibilities contained in the English alphabet. Nothing is possible without the information. The cell can do nothing without it except die. All of the processes in the cell are interdependent with each other and they all depend on the information and the precise instructions given by the DNA and by other means.
The cell is like a machine of life. Parts of the machine can be altered and it will still work to some extent, and people can purposely change some of the information in the DNA but the point is that there must be some logic to it. It definitely is not just a mindless code that can be ordered randomly. And it certainly is not just a disordered jumble of proteins that simply react according to the laws of thermodynamics. They do of course react precisely according to those laws but only as they are shielded and directed in those chemical reactions by the unique order dictated by the information. In other words, the proteins that are manufactured are not allowed to simply float about looking for a function or a random chemical reaction to engage in anymore than an automatic transmission is simply a box full of gears that are randomly thrown into a metal case.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Goingonit
|
 |
Toronto, Canada - AECCP member
Apr 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
Lincoln, I suggest you review the Law of Truly Large Numbers.
The earth was created 4.5 billion years ago. The same way that one would assume that nobody could win the lottery twice in a row, *nobody* could have created life, because the chance of life randomly forming is 1 in 1,000,000,000... If the chance of life spontaneously forming in any gven chemical reaction is 1 in 1 quintillion, then there is actually quite a large chance of life forming over the history of the earth.
Besides, we have the whole universe to think about. If you may ask, "but what are the chances that life would start on this particular planet?" remember that the only thing special about this planet is that we live on it, and we could only be living on a planet in which life was created! Therefore, I would suggest not only that blind chance COULD have created life, but that if you leave a universe alone for 12 billion years, it is improbable that it NOT create life.
This is like the "infinite monkeys" problem - we are trying to type a line of Shakespeare, and we DO have a nearly infinite number of chances.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mactbone
|
 |
Lift Your Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
Sep 2001
time: 23:17
|
|
DNA, is not just a genetic code. We call it that becaus that's how we make sense of it. Let's step bck as you say and consider. All of those letters represent various enzymes. These enzymes are attracted to each other. Now, they did not need to be told to connect to each other. They do so, because that is their chemical makeup. I liken it to the concept of gravity. Gravity did not need to be created, we experience i because the Earth is a certain size, shape, and density. So, there are things that happe without any intervention.
Most of your arguments make some sense if you view the world as a human does, but what if someone had an entirely different way of percieving the world around them, would they be able to follow your argument, translating your argument into their perception?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
lightblue
|
|
L'Boro, UK
Oct 2001
time: 05:17
|
|
On a similar note to MacTBone's post:
Why does A pair with T and G with C? Because that is how they fit together with respect to the hydrogen bonding that keeps the two helices together. A and T form 2 hydrogen bonds and G and C form 3.
By the text you've written I think you know something about biology, but for the others here's a link: http://www.amug.org/~rwiley/Organic...nucleotides.htm .
There are other nucleotides (inosil springs to mind), which can be used to replace a couple of the other ones.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001
time: 23:17
|
|
Hi Lincoln (though we have never met)
Your argument does not really call for design, but for will... that something, trough action begun a process otherwise impossible, but once the process begun, long ago, we could, as all the mathematicians have stated, already gotten to were we are. What is this will? Perhaps it is the Yehova of the Torah, but perhaps its the will to power Schopenhauer spoke of, after reading up on hindu thought, trying to come to self-understanding by creating parts of itself capable of self-knowledge.
The great fault of those trying to 'prove' their religion against science is that in the process, they also ignore all other religions. Fine, even if you are right about god, does that prove Judaism, Islam, or Christianity? and which sect? To disprove us Aethists, you must disprove not only 400 years of scienctific development, but thousands of years of other religious thought by other peoples. Until you can prove to me not only that science was wrong, but that everyone but you, and what you believe exactly is true, I will stay safely on my little aethist spot.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alexander's Horse
|
 |
Panmunjon, hands up!
Jan 1970
time: 15:17
|
|
Nothing new about atheism. The old testament addresses it in one of the psalms I think.
The passage reads:
"The fool says, in his heart, 'there is no God'."
I always found this little passage interesting. It has three basic ideas but a lot more depth of meaning if you think about it, like most bible passages.
Firstly, it describes atheists as fools. Why are they fools? because they ignore the evidence of their own senses. God is most manifest in creation.
Secondly, the atheist says it, "in his heart". In other words, whilst they base their arguments on reason, it is in fact by ignoring reason that they conclude there is no God. The universe popped into being out of nothing without a creator? Yeah right 
Thirdly, the atheist "says" "there is no God." In other words it is an assertion not based on objective facts. It is a belief that the atheist holds. Nothing more. So its quite funny really when atheists ridicule believers in God for their faith. They have their own faith i.e. atheism.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Hi Che,
I should be back in Tennessee in a month or two so maybe we can get together yet. I will let you know when I get back.
To everyone else,
It is kind of frustrating trying to do this debate while being cut off line every 5 minutes or so but I think I can answer generally the points raised. First it is true that I have not proved Christianity over any other religion. That was not the point of the book.
The attractions and chemical bonds within life does not solve the information problem. That is merely the mechanical method that the information uses.
The idea of fantastic odds producing life somehow because of the amount of time available or the size of the universe is not logical. Some things will never happen regardless of space or time. For instance I found a couple of gear from an old watch in the sand once. It was on a shaft inside of a hollow shaft that had another gear attached to it that meshed with another. No amount of time or space would ever produce such a thing. Certainly even the postulated beginning forms of life are more complicated than the simple gears that I found that were designed by intelligence.
Large numbers do not solve the problem. If 2 plus 2 equals 4 then no amount of time will change that. The “large numbers” will merely cloud the solution to the problem which is simple. Proof should not be hard to find in this information age. Simply allow a computer to produce the information from a completely random program with no intelligent input.
Now I lost one of the questions but I think it had to do with the nature of various enzymes and the method of translating the DNA code. All of these operations within the cell are very interesting but the issue is evaded by entangling ourselves in the chemical reactions which I concede are entirely according to the laws of thermodynamics. Life is more than proteins that float around, regardless of how those proteins are manufactured. The proteins are tools that must be ordered about logically in order to perform their specific tasks. Saying that they do it automatically because of chemical laws is like saying that my computer typed in this post entirely according to established laws of science. There is something behind the communication that takes place in the function of life that chemical laws cannot explain.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Goingonit
|
|
Toronto, Canada - AECCP member
Apr 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lincoln
The attractions and chemical bonds within life does not solve the information problem. That is merely the mechanical method that the information uses.
|
No. All DNA needs is 1 enzyme (I believe it is called unzipase) to split it in half and it can be self-replicating. There were probably smaller macromolecules that needed even less.
quote:
The idea of fantastic odds producing life somehow because of the amount of time available or the size of the universe is not logical. Some things will never happen regardless of space or time. For instance I found a couple of gear from an old watch in the sand once. It was on a shaft inside of a hollow shaft that had another gear attached to it that meshed with another. No amount of time or space would ever produce such a thing. Certainly even the postulated beginning forms of life are more complicated than the simple gears that I found that were designed by intelligence.
|
Question of scale - molecules DO form randomly, many times every second. Furthermore, while carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen in solution can react with each other, steel is fairly inert, except by oxidization.
quote:
Large numbers do not solve the problem. If 2 plus 2 equals 4 then no amount of time will change that. The “large numbers” will merely cloud the solution to the problem which is simple. Proof should not be hard to find in this information age. Simply allow a computer to produce the information from a completely random program with no intelligent input.
|
But if you add a number from 1 to 1,000,000 with another number from 1 to 1,000,000, there is some chance you will get 4.
As quantuum phenomena show, wierd things DO happen when probability is taken into account.
quote:
The proteins are tools that must be ordered about logically in order to perform their specific tasks |
The basic task of life is self-replication. As I said earlier, only one protein is needed for DNA to do this.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
"Tell us about the Thai women."
Actually there is no Thai woman but I kinda wish there was. These must be the most feminine and beautiful women in the world. Most are kind of shy (I'm not talking about bar girls here). I do know one in particular who has also introduced me to her friends and family. She is a real sweet heart but we are just casual friends.
The men here have a reputation for treating their wives like so much ****. Not all of course but it is not at all unusual for them to have what they call here "minor wives". It is a real pity because the women are generally very faithful. Many foreigners are attracted to Thai women because they do not like the feminism in the west and they would just like a kind hearted woman who does not want to be a man.
Thai women are engaged in business here and they do not seem to be oppressed in the least. Thai culture seems to have found a balance that would work quite well I think if the men were more considerate of the gentle and kind nature of their wives.
I must say that the women make this society work. The mothers especially are held in high regard.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Jesus H Christ
|
|
Heaven.
Feb 2002
time: 05:17
|
|
You know, Dad once told me that the funniest prank he ever pulled was telling Moses that the world was created in 7 days. If I recall correctly, his exact words were:
"And, can you believe it? He bought it!"
Mom wasn't pleased, but then, she was always the strict one in the family. She argued with Dad for a whole week about this issue, but I gotta go with Dad on this one (and this is the argument that made Mom, if not hush completely on the subject, calm down a bit.) He said:
"Honey, how am I supposed to explain Cosmology to a man who doesn't even know the Sun is a star? And I tell you what: if you think it's so bloody easy, you go and teach these bronze-agers about evolution, ok dear?"
Man, Dad just cracks me up!
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lightblue
|
|
L'Boro, UK
Oct 2001
time: 05:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Jesus H Christ
You know, Dad once told me that the funniest prank he ever pulled was telling Moses that the world was created in 7 days. If I recall correctly, his exact words were:
"And, can you believe it? He bought it!"
Mom wasn't pleased, but then, she was always the strict one in the family. She argued with Dad for a whole week about this issue, but I gotta go with Dad on this one (and this is the argument that made Mom, if not hush completely on the subject, calm down a bit.) He said:
"Honey, how am I supposed to explain Cosmology to a man who doesn't even know the Sun is a star? And I tell you what: if you think it's so bloody easy, you go and teach these bronze-agers about evolution, ok dear?"
Man, Dad just cracks me up! |
Now this is one good personality... Shame it's been knocked into orbit. Wonder who it was?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lars-E
|
|
AH, interesting exegesis on Psalms 14:1.
About atheists: I heard a funny "joke" this evening:
"God has a fun time around atheists. He laffs at them."
I think the laughing is in the bible. I think mocking too. Seems quite natural that God would laff around atheists.
quote:
Like what? You mean like what Lincoln gives? That doesn't prove that there is a god, but rather how little we understand the mechanisms of life or early evolution. |
By external evidence I think AH means nature. And if we understand so little about evolution how come so many ppl are convinced it's the truth and nothing but the truth. Propaganda perhaps? The world wants to be fooled and ppl will think whatever suit their fancy. And it is hard for some ppl to face up to a living God who does not tolerate sin. I guess ppl feel uncomfortabel if they're not saved and God is close by. They feel condemned, not because of the christians as many claim, but because they are under conviction by God himself as the bible states: "because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction." (1 Thess 1:5) Even though there's deep conviction involved the Word of God is still rejected "Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit." (1 Thess 1:8). So according to the bible much of this is not related to reasoning about (evolution)/atheism , but rather an attitude problem. I'm sure there's more to it, but that's all I could dig up for now.
quote:
AH, the Universe never *popped* into existence. It always was and always will be. You cannot get something from nothing. The Universe is something, so it always was, and never arose out of nothing. This also means the Universe always will be. |
So you don't believe in the big bang or creation? This doesn't seem to be mainstream thought.
Large numbers: In theory anything can happen. Regardless ppl don't think that anything is possible? If n monkey were given n typewriters in theory they could produce 1 encyclopedia after m years. In theory this could happen, but who in here would actually believe it?
I'm glad Jesus H Christ is deactivated. He didn't seem to believe in himself. What does the H stand for BTW?
quote:
Actually, you find the roles of men and women in Asia pretty much the same throughout. Not too different from the West, but less loss of face in this regard for the men. |
Scandinavians and Japanese can lose face.
Lincoln, I asked you about Thai women comparing to "women of the West" because you stated something about this when you left the USA. I was not meaning to be impolite. Hopefully you will find a nice christian Thai lady.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Goingonit
|
|
Toronto, Canada - AECCP member
Apr 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lars-E
I think the laughing is in the bible. I think mocking too. Seems quite natural that God would laff around atheists.
|
God doesn't mock. He is a jealous God, a merciful God, a vengeful God, but not a God renowned for a sense of humour.
quote:
By external evidence I think AH means nature. And if we understand so little about evolution how come so many ppl are convinced it's the truth and nothing but the truth. Propaganda perhaps? |
We can know something is true without knowing why. An example is quantuum mechanics. This is one of the most accurate theories ever made, yet it is impossible to explain or understand.
And we know about evolution because of Occam's Razor, which states that with a full set of facts, the simplest theory is the correct one.
quote:
The world wants to be fooled and ppl will think whatever suit their fancy. And it is hard for some ppl to face up to a living God who does not tolerate sin. I guess ppl feel uncomfortabel if they're not saved and God is close by. They feel condemned, not because of the christians as many claim, but because they are under conviction by God himself as the bible states: "because our gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction." (1 Thess 1:5) Even though there's deep conviction involved the Word of God is still rejected "Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit." (1 Thess 1:8). So according to the bible much of this is not related to reasoning about (evolution)/atheism , but rather an attitude problem. I'm sure there's more to it, but that's all I could dig up for now. |
Point well taken. Yet it works against you too. People want to think that there is a purpose to life and that there is also a meaning to death. This belief is what underlies religion; people cling to faith because, in part, they fear the unknown: life and death are most certainly unknown.
quote:
Large numbers: In theory anything can happen. Regardless ppl don't think that anything is possible? If n monkey were given n typewriters in theory they could produce 1 encyclopedia after m years. In theory this could happen, but who in here would actually believe it? |
Me. Here is a good site. You may want to check its entry on creationism as well, although the autor tends to be dismissive about certain things. http://www.skepdic.com/lawofnumbers.html
BTW, I just talked to my uncle who is making a documentary on genetics. He told me that RNA can act as an enzyme and split itself. Thus, no information whatsoever is needed, but just RNA, any RNA, and life will be formed.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Goingonit,
You seem to be missing the point entirely.
You need to read the chapter Snowflakes and DNA. there are no chemical reactions that can explain the specific order of DNA. I am talking about the lateral reactions. Read the chapter and get back to me. A,G,C,T all have an equal lateral bonding capability. The order that they are in is not explained by chemical laws.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Goingonit
|
|
Toronto, Canada - AECCP member
Apr 2001
time: 00:17
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lincoln
Goingonit,
You seem to be missing the point entirely.
You need to read the chapter Snowflakes and DNA. there are no chemical reactions that can explain the specific order of DNA. I am talking about the lateral reactions. Read the chapter and get back to me. A,G,C,T all have an equal lateral bonding capability. The order that they are in is not explained by chemical laws. |
You seem to be missing the point entirely. Life is possible without any language at all. RNA will split itself, and self-replicate itself.
As for the language, nobody understands it. But once again, Occam to the rescue! Which is more likely: there is a biochemical explanation that we do not know yet, or that there is a supernatural intelligence who decided to make DNA the way it is? There have been unknown things throughout history; now we know their cause. There has been no great mystery which has been proven unprovable.
Last edited by Goingonit on 11-02-2002 at 08:53
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Here is an excerpt:
Now what about the letters (or chemicals) that you initially arranged in any random order? In my instructions you remember that I said to put the 4 letters in whatever order that you wanted. This still is in some ways just simple chemical reactions. There is nothing miraculous about how they are put together if you think of four different people holding hands. They are joined together by their hands gripping each other. In that sense the 4 chemicals A, T, C, and G have no problem with holding hands with each other. They are not in the least bit prejudiced so they can be arranged in any order and they are still quite happy. The only question that remains really is what does the order mean to the living cell and the human being or plant that results from that seemingly random order of letters? Here is where simple chemical laws of nature break down. The reason they break down is not because chemical laws or thermodynamic laws are defied but because they cannot explain the order which as it turns out is not random at all. My analogy of the ladder was not correct in one place and that is where I told you to write the letters in any random order that you chose. In real life they appear to be random just like the ones that you did but they are in a precise order that represents a coded language.
If only chemical laws were being considered then the DNA code would be entirely random. Of course it is not.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lincoln
|
|
Sorry buddy but relpication has nothing to do with the origin of information. There is no question about replication. The question is the origin of the information to begin with.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17.
Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-02-2002 13:45
coming up.
|