coded information in DNA

Then stop writing like there is. You wrote: But DNA, and its transcription and translation, are in the "physico-chemical world". Fairies and angels are not involved in any stage of the process. If you admit that you can't answer that, I think we're done here. But they're the same question. The origin of the code, and the origin of the molecules that instantiate the code, are the same thing. If the DNA and the mechanisms of transcription and translation didn't exist, then we would not be having this discussion.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

So, you're a polytheist?Tell me, when you don't how something has happened in the history of the universe, do you habitually assume that deities are responsible, and that you have "proved" the existence of those deities by making that assumption? Why not: Now, if you'd made that argument about 50 years ago, it would be as good a "God of the gaps" argument as the one you're making now. What would have been proven?As it is, we now know quite a lot about star formation, and there's even the well explained relics of an ancient natural nuclear "power staion" in Australia.We're trying to explain to you in various ways how your argument is meaningless. Making analogies of things in nature to things we make can be useful as illustration, but argument by analogy means nothing.The author of this page is delusional.Information Theory and DNAA parody:1 - All known intelligent creatures require the genetic code.2 - The genetic code must be a prerequisite for intelligence.3 - The genetic code, therefore, cannot be designed.If you can provide an example of an intelligent being who does not depend on the genetic code you can prove this false. All you need is one.

First, use THE REPLY BUTTON. Then I suppose you are arguing for the creation of the "first DNA", right? Because natural processes do produce DNA (through replication and mutation).
What I was arguing is that it was pointless to argue this because it doesn't follow logically. Moreover, it can be argued that minds can't form without DNA, meaning that DNA was needed to create the mind that created DNA, which is absurd.
That's why there are experiences and theories of abiogenesis. Those are the ones you should address, if you are right, it shouldn't be hard to disprove them.
By the way, Islam tried supernatural thinking in the middle age and that's why they are thirld world countries while they had the most developped science before that. That's why science don't use magical thinking.

Hi, WordBeLogos. To be specific, Son means the "reply" button at the bottom of each post, not the "gen reply" button at the bottom of the page: this links your post to the post you're replying to and helps us know who you're talking to.Thanks.

---

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)Darwin loves you.

Hello Bluejay, When we see an arrangement of pebbles that say "It is appointed unto man once to die, then after this the judgment," is this just the inherent physical properties of pebbles lining up according to "laws of nature?"What does this arrangment of pebbles now contain that they didn't while just lying around randomly? Still the same pebbles. Still the same properties. Still the same laws of nature. They now contain information (a message) which did not originate from the laws of nature or the properties of the pebbles. Precisely the case in DNA. Edited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given.

Guys, gotta run again, time is very limited these days...i'll catch back in a bit.

According to your argument, as soon as we observe humans arranging pebbles then we must assume that all unknown arrangement of pebbles are also intelligently guided.

You don't really mean to say that they didn't "originate from the laws of nature." Everything that happens obeys the laws of nature. What you really mean to say is that they didn't happen naturally, by which you actually mean that people did it.But this is not a discussion of nature on the one hand and man on the other. In this discussion man is part of nature. It does not matter if the pebbles were arranged by people, by animals, or by random events, their arrangement still represents information.I earlier gave you example of Alphabits cereal. If you arrange three letters to spell "yes", that is information. But if you jostle the box and three letters fall out to spell "yes", that is also information. In fact, any arrangement of letters is information. That some arrangements happen to correspond to words to which we attach meaning (which as Shannon tells us is independent of information) is irrelevant to the information itself. Speaking digitally, information is just bits, it doesn't matter what meaning people might attach to the arrangement of bits.We do know that information arises naturally all the time. Nothing happens anywhere that doesn't create new information. Your fundamental argument is actually that the origin of DNA could not have been a natural event, in that it would have required intelligence to create it and the processes that surround it. You have so far produced no evidence to support your position.The only kind of properties and processes we've ever observed in the universe are all natural, and so we explain DNA in terms of those properties and processes. You postulate that there are properties and processes of which we're yet unaware, and perhaps that is so, but again, you need evidence.Neptune was discovered in part because the orbit of Uranus deviated from its calculated path, so it was presumed that there must be another planetary body out there perturbing its orbit. You need the equivalent of something that deviates from known physical laws in ways we can't currently explain in order to claim that there must be something more going on than we're currently aware. Just stating over and over and over again that DNA could not have arisen naturally won't get you anywhere.There's another bigger problem that rarely gets addressed in ID discussions, and that's where the designer came from. If DNA requires a designer, and if the designer was an advanced alien, then the alien's DNA would have required a designer. And that alien's DNA would also have required a designer. And so on back to the beginning of time, and at some point you just have to call a halt and say God did it.So why not just admit that ID requires God and is religion.--Percy

But the difference here is, as you said, "If a person who understands English *AND* Pashtu." The fact remains, both languages use a unique set of agreed upon symbols which represent the same thing. That's all. Each langauge agrees on the same set of symbols. DNA language agrees on the same set of symbols likewise. English agrees with english symbols. Pashtu agrees with Pashtu symbols. DNA agrees with DNA symbols.-Word

---

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Hi bluegenes, But this is today. The laws of nature are well understood. We know they can account for fire and nuclear power. The physics and chemistry of DNA are also very well understood. This *IS* the problem. And yet again... Emphasis mine.That's pretty clear. Can't sqweeze water out of a dry towel.-WordEdited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given.

---

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Hi Tag, As of yet, we observe none exists. Just as of yet, we observe that neither energy nor matter can be destroyed. Neither are proven impossible, there is just simply no evidence to the contrary.-WordEdited by WordBeLogos, : No reason given.

---

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Tag, All communication systems are subject to mutations, according to the laws of probability. Thats why Ethernet and IP/TCP have error correction / redundancy features. Yes, DNA has error correction / redundancy features also. Good point.-Word

---

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Hello lyx2no, And what accounts for the square holes being arranged in the precise order which spells out the complete assemblage instructions to build a space shuttle? Chance?-Word

---

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

How do you know that natural processes do not? - because we don't see it occuring today?DNA exists, there was a point in time when it did not, so some kind of process happened, right? - So you think something supernatural had to construct this?What "organized" the complexity of this supernatural "thing" that was able to construct natural things? - And why don't we see this process today? Or, was it's only objective to simply organize a few chemicals then vanish, forever?Why do natural, chemical processes construct whole organisms now, each one different from the next?Wouldn't that require that the "original" information in the first DNA structure changed through time, causing the information to change also?Wouldn't a new set of information be required to change the DNA for every single species every time there's an enviromental change?- Oni

Dr, Hardware does not give rise to software Dr.-Word

---

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.