|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Is ID Scientific? (was "Abusive Assumptions") | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: That, actually, is my point: the terms are used as analogies to explain how the whole system operates. "Messenger RNA" are not little cowboys riding ponies with letters in their saddle bags, nor is DNA a "code" that sends meaningful "information" from a sentient sender to a sentient reciever. You are the one letting analogies get in the way of understanding how the system works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
I suppose that we could call the undulations in the landscape a "code" that tells a river which exact path to take when to flows into the ocean.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evopeach Member (Idle past 6634 days) Posts: 224 From: Stroud, OK USA Joined: |
Yes so inefficient that the speed of replication of 3,000,000 base pairs every few minutes with accuracy that exceed the current world-wide six sigma asperation of quality. Pitiful!!
Please don't even try to say that the genetic code is not a code or ribosomes do not read the m-rna, I mean how many scientific texts, papers or citations do want me to provide to drown your rediculous statement where those terms are precisely used and explained as such with the exact terminology. I think this sort of obfuscation and meaningless assertion is not worth my time. any real adults out there
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6516 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
precicely my point. Good illustration.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6516 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
Yes so inefficient that the speed of replication of 3,000,000 base pairs every few minutes with accuracy that exceed the current world-wide six sigma asperation of quality. Pitiful!! This is a pointless statistic that doesn't even begin to address the points I raised. DNA is not a meaningful code, it is written in an inefficient "language" and riddled with errors. DNA replication isn't perfect BTW, it is error prone. DNA does not communicate any information, as I said before it's a catalyst in a chemical reaction. Chrioptera made a good analogy with the topography 'coding' the river.
Please don't even try to say that the genetic code is not a code or ribosomes do not read the m-rna, I mean how many scientific texts, papers or citations do want me to provide to drown your rediculous statement where those terms are precisely used and explained as such with the exact terminology. Terminology isn't the issue. We may call it a "sunrise" but that dosn't mean the sun is orbiting us does it?
I think this sort of obfuscation and meaningless assertion is not worth my time. My my, you certainly do think highly of yourself don't you? I'm so sorry Mr. Humble, I thought we were ARGUING IN GOOD FAITH! Have a look at the Forum Rules before toeing the Ad Homenim line.
any real adults out there If you keep using this "tone" I'm sure you will attract the wrath of the admins. I don't think you know what kind of forum you are on but you will be surprised to know that many of us aren't only adults but scientists as well. This message has been edited by Yaro, 08-03-2005 06:56 PM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evopeach Member (Idle past 6634 days) Posts: 224 From: Stroud, OK USA Joined: |
Or you could just just substitute dextro forms of amino acids into the dna strands and since it is absolutely provably true that they are chemically and entropically absolutely indistinguishable by Chemical means then the DNA RNA ribozome process will work just fine I mean since its purely chemical and enzymatic and such.
Oops, it turns out one base pair substitution of dextro gums the entire works. Sorry ! Won't work not ever. Has to be 100% optically pure to work. See its a specific code of a distinct nature.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6516 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
Why do you keep replying to yourself? Are there two evopeaches?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminNosy Administrator Posts: 4754 From: Vancouver, BC, Canada Joined: |
The approach you are taking and the tenor of your posts are not conducive to civil discussing. Please do not continue in this way.
You will be given some degree of latitude being new but at some point you will lose posting privileges for a day.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
This doesn't have anything to do with the meaning of the words "code", "information", or anything else. Are you now discussing something else?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1487 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
Perhaps a simpler analogy will help. Why would an analogy help? The subject is DNA, not machine shops. Try to stay on topic, ok? It would be better for you to actually study DNA, not draw specious comparisons to machine shops and the like.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Especially since Evopeach seems to have trouble equating analogy with identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
I was a little impatient with Evopeach's initial posts (sorry, but I deeply dislike any anti-evolution argument that uses "information"). She (or he?) may have misinterpreted my impatience with hostility and felt that it was fair to respond in kind.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Yaro Member (Idle past 6516 days) Posts: 1797 Joined: |
Meh... I think she/he may have been a hit and run.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
Darn. I was just getting into the discussion, too. As usual, the discussion helped a lot in allowing me to put a finer point on this topic. I want to thank Evopeach for bringing up the word "analogy" -- that was exactly the word I needed to make the point understandable.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Evopeach Member (Idle past 6634 days) Posts: 224 From: Stroud, OK USA Joined: |
Earlier before attending delightful musical I carefully expressed a hypothesis, corrolaries , predictive value and falsifiability.
Just once I would like to see if anyone in your camp could reply with a rational rebuttal that referenced real publications of experimentation valid and reviewed that proved the proposal invalid. There is something wrong with a group of people who cannot and will not defend their position with other than form over substance, dismissive assertions without proof, redefining away the problem in contrast to the existing body of work they ascribe to. My guess is that you are not serious people and truly unable to discuss rationally. Its not in the spirit of the forum as stated at introduction.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024