Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
8 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,814 Year: 3,071/9,624 Month: 916/1,588 Week: 99/223 Day: 10/17 Hour: 6/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is there a legitimate argument for design?
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 151 of 638 (724754)
04-20-2014 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by subbie
04-20-2014 11:49 AM


Re: DNA evolves
It in fact does NOT proscribe every single detail of what an organism is going to look like and does not contain detailed instructions about how to create an organism.
So, you are introducing a new concept. Please elaborate; what grounds do you have for your statement?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by subbie, posted 04-20-2014 11:49 AM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by subbie, posted 04-20-2014 12:54 PM Ed67 has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1254 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 152 of 638 (724755)
04-20-2014 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Ed67
04-20-2014 12:04 PM


Re: DNA evolves
Ed67 writes:
So, you are introducing a new concept.
I am not introducing a new concept. I'm debunking the idea that you introduced, that of DNA as a blueprint.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Ed67, posted 04-20-2014 12:04 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by Ed67, posted 04-20-2014 1:02 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied
 Message 162 by Ed67, posted 04-22-2014 9:15 PM subbie has replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 153 of 638 (724757)
04-20-2014 1:02 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by subbie
04-20-2014 12:54 PM


Re: DNA evolves
I'm debunking the idea that you introduced, that of DNA as a blueprint.
So get on with it. So far you have only made assertions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by subbie, posted 04-20-2014 12:54 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by frako, posted 04-21-2014 6:52 AM Ed67 has replied

  
xongsmith
Member
Posts: 2578
From: massachusetts US
Joined: 01-01-2009
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 154 of 638 (724772)
04-20-2014 4:59 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by subbie
04-20-2014 11:49 AM


Re: DNA evolves
KillebrewFan writes:
A blueprint specifies every single dimension and every single detail of a building, from height to floor spacing to wiring and plumbing. DNA doesn't actually specify very much at all. That's not how it functions. It in fact does NOT proscribe every single detail of what an organism is going to look like and does not contain detailed instructions about how to create an organism.
Hmmm. They say that most of DNA is junk. What if those dead zones controlled which cell was which as the zygote grew, then shut themselves off so as appear dead & junk today.

- xongsmith, 5.7d

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by subbie, posted 04-20-2014 11:49 AM subbie has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Ed67, posted 04-22-2014 11:05 PM xongsmith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 155 of 638 (724776)
04-20-2014 5:34 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Ed67
04-20-2014 8:30 AM


Didn't they teach you about honesty in kindergarten?
I really can't remember. Now, why are you attributing to me an argument I never made, even going to the extent of adorning your dishonesty with things in quotation marks which I never wrote?
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Ed67, posted 04-20-2014 8:30 AM Ed67 has not replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


Message 156 of 638 (724809)
04-21-2014 6:52 AM
Reply to: Message 153 by Ed67
04-20-2014 1:02 PM


Re: DNA evolves
I'm debunking the idea that you introduced, that of DNA as a blueprint.
So get on with it. So far you have only made assertions.
A blueprint = a design plan or other technical drawing.
DNa is definitively not that
At best it would be an a punch-card-automaton, that produces proteins.

Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
What are the Christians gonna do to me ..... Forgive me, good luck with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Ed67, posted 04-20-2014 1:02 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2014 8:09 AM frako has not replied
 Message 167 by Ed67, posted 04-23-2014 8:47 AM frako has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 157 of 638 (724810)
04-21-2014 8:09 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by frako
04-21-2014 6:52 AM


Re: DNA evolves
At best it would be an a punch-card-automaton, that produces proteins.
Sometimes with hanging chads that change the protein being made.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by frako, posted 04-21-2014 6:52 AM frako has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 158 of 638 (724811)
04-21-2014 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 149 by Ed67
04-20-2014 11:20 AM


Re: DNA evolves and has evolved
I just choose not to respond to silly assertions and baseless arguments. I hope you are not offended, but I'm waiting for anyone here to say anything INTELLEGENT about the origin of the blueprints found in the DNA molecule.
Well that is one way to deal with reality, one way to maintain your ignorance and dependency on misleading information.
Curiously I see you've changed from "code" to "blueprint" ... it can't be both you know, so at some level you must realize that neither is really an accurate description.
CB180: DNA as language
quote:
The genetic code is not a true code; it is more of a cypher. DNA is a sequence of four different bases (denoted A, C, G, and T) along a backbone. When DNA gets translated to protein, triplets of bases (codons) get converted sequentially to the amino acids that make up the protein, with some codons acting as a "stop" marker. The mapping from codon to amino acid is arbitrary (not completely arbitrary, but close enough for purposes of argument). However, that one mapping step -- from 64 possible codons to 20 amino acids and a stop signal -- is the only arbitrariness in the genetic code. The protein itself is a physical object whose function is determined by its physical properties.
Furthermore, DNA gets used for more than making proteins. Much DNA is transcribed directly to functional RNA. Other DNA acts to regulate genetic processes. The physical properties of the DNA and RNA, not any arbitrary meanings, determine how they act.
So recipe is a better analogy than code or blueprint.
And the replication process is subject to errors,
All you have presented are assertions and innuendo, bolstered by logical fallacies and confirmation bias, not by any real evidence.
We observe DNA evolving.
We observe markers of past moments in the evolving DNA that tie species together in nested hierarchies.
Blueprints and codes do not create nested hierarchies.
Therefore blueprints and codes are not a valid description of the process of life, they are either the wrong explanation or an incomplete explanation.
The argument that you can't imagine how DNA could have evolved is (a) the argument from incredulity logical fallacy, (b) a lack of imagination, and (c) thinking based on ignorance\undereducation on how DNA operates in the real world and how evolution works in the real world.
So have another chuckle: what you are laughing at is yourself. Amusing.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Ed67, posted 04-20-2014 11:20 AM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by Ed67, posted 04-22-2014 9:31 PM RAZD has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


(2)
Message 159 of 638 (724888)
04-22-2014 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 135 by Ed67
04-18-2014 8:37 AM


Ed67 writes:
"Please present the data."
I thought, at this stage of the game, that you would have granted this as common knowledge.
Err, actually, the occurrence DNA is common knowledge. Everything else about DNA is not common knowledge. The guys who know much about it are the geneticists who actually study DNA. What is common knowledge is that creationists make up their own meanings of words and then pretend that it's 'scientific'.
Ed67 writes:
How many base-pair combinations are there in all the DNA in one single cell?
Well, according to the specialists, it depends on the species.
Ed67 writes:
Well, how long is the 'character string' (the DNA in a nucleus straightened out and put in a line)? Surely someone on this thread remembers about how long scientists say the DNA molecule is...
Well, according to the specialists, it depends on the species.
Ed67 writes:
So, how many digital 'signals' can be sent in the DNA molecules of a cell?
Digital signals from DNA? This doesn't make any sense.
Ed67 writes:
Well, we'd have to know how many signals can be stored per unit length. But let me give you a clue; they're SMALLER than microscopic.
This doesn't make any sense. How do you measure the amount of signals stored per unit lenght? What units do you use to measure those?
Ed67 writes:
So, there's the 'data' that supports my claim that there is "LOTS" of specified information stored in the DNA molecules.
This sounds like an essay. How do you meaure the amount of 'specified information'?
Ed67 writes:
As for your comment:
"At least the scientists presented peer-reviewed, scientific evidence.", ok I'm too lazy to read through this thread, but we'll see about that.
Well, you should start reading peer-reviewed biological journals. And the responses.
Ed67 writes:
This is a cool forum, guys, I'm glad I found it. But I see it's going to take a lot more work than I'm used to so bear with me...btw, what's with the drama queen? lol.
So far it seems as if you're the only drama queen around on this thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 135 by Ed67, posted 04-18-2014 8:37 AM Ed67 has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


(2)
Message 160 of 638 (724915)
04-22-2014 11:40 AM
Reply to: Message 144 by Ed67
04-20-2014 8:26 AM


RE: Is there a legitimate argument for design?
Ed67 writes:
The 'code' is the SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENT of bases along the DNA molecule.
Every molecule has a specific arrangement. There is nothing about the DNA molecule that is unique in that regard; the chemistry of DNA isn't fundamentally different from the chemistry of water. It does what it has to do. It could be said that life is just a byproduct of DNA's natural chemistry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Ed67, posted 04-20-2014 8:26 AM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Ed67, posted 04-22-2014 8:08 PM ringo has replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 161 of 638 (724934)
04-22-2014 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by ringo
04-22-2014 11:40 AM


RE: Is there a legitimate argument for design?
"Ringo" writes:
Ed67 writes:
The 'code' is the SPECIFIC ARRANGEMENT of bases along the DNA molecule.
Every molecule has a specific arrangement. (1) There is nothing about the DNA molecule that is unique in that regard; (2) THE CHEMISTRY OF DNA ISN'T FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE CHEMISTRY OF WATER. It does what it has to do. It could be said that (3) life is just a byproduct of DNA's natural chemistry.
Hmm... that was a very richly packed reply. I take exception to each of your 3 points above. So I'd like us to unpack these remarks together and look at them separately(pardon the pun).
(1)
"Ringo" writes:
There is nothing about the DNA molecule that is unique in its specific arrangement.
I'd like you to cite your source on this point, please, unless it's your opinion.
(2)
"Ringo" writes:
The Chemistry of DNA isn't fundamentally different from the chemistry of water.
I'd like to see your source on this one, too. This doesn't sound like any water I've seen:
But what, exactly, is DNA? In short, DNA is a complex molecule that consists of many components, a portion of which are passed from parent organisms to their offspring during the process of reproduction. http://www.nature.com/...ure-that-encodes-biological-6493050
(3)
"Ringo" writes:
Life is just a byproduct of DNA's natural chemistry.
What makes you think that? That's what Francis Crick hypothesized and disproved in the fifties, isn't it?
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by ringo, posted 04-22-2014 11:40 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by ringo, posted 04-23-2014 11:48 AM Ed67 has replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 162 of 638 (724935)
04-22-2014 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by subbie
04-20-2014 12:54 PM


Re: DNA evolves
subbie writes:
Ed67 writes:
quote:
So, you are introducing a new concept.
I am not introducing a new concept. I'm debunking the idea that you introduced, that of DNA as a blueprint.
Ok, call it what you will. Just get on with it. By all means, debunk my idea of DNA as a 'blueprint'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by subbie, posted 04-20-2014 12:54 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by subbie, posted 04-23-2014 10:02 AM Ed67 has replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 163 of 638 (724937)
04-22-2014 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by RAZD
04-21-2014 8:38 AM


Did DNA Originate by Evolution?
RAZD writes:
So recipe is a better analogy than code or blueprint.
Ok, this is your own word so all your gang can agree with it lol.
So, do recipes include cooking instructions?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2014 8:38 AM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by RAZD, posted 04-23-2014 6:50 PM Ed67 has not replied

  
Ed67
Member (Idle past 3329 days)
Posts: 159
Joined: 04-14-2014


Message 164 of 638 (724938)
04-22-2014 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by xongsmith
04-20-2014 4:59 PM


Re: DNA evolves
xongsmith writes:
KillebrewFan writes:
A blueprint specifies every single dimension and every single detail of a building, from height to floor spacing to wiring and plumbing. DNA doesn't actually specify very much at all. That's not how it functions. It in fact does NOT proscribe every single detail of what an organism is going to look like and does not contain detailed instructions about how to create an organism.
Hmmm. They say that most of DNA is junk. What if those dead zones controlled which cell was which as the zygote grew, then shut themselves off so as appear dead & junk today.
Your point in saying that DNA "does not contain detailed instructions about how to create an organism" is interesting. You are correct.
I recant if I have said that.
What I mean is that DNA contains detailed instructions on how to REPLICATE, or 're-create' an organism. These instructions must have originally come from some cause; they could have come from an intelligent source, as intelligence is known to be sufficient cause for the kind of instructions contained in the 'recipe' of DNA.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by xongsmith, posted 04-20-2014 4:59 PM xongsmith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Pressie, posted 04-23-2014 6:07 AM Ed67 has replied

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 165 of 638 (724946)
04-23-2014 6:07 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Ed67
04-22-2014 11:05 PM


Re: DNA evolves
Ed67 writes:
What I mean is that DNA contains detailed instructions on how to REPLICATE,..
Exactly like salt crystals can do. Just get a bit of rain water, dissolve a bit of the salt crystal, and depending on the temperature and pressure, they can replicate. All by themselves.
Ed67 writes:
...or 're-create' an organism.
Or salt crystals.
Ed67 writes:
These instructions must have originally come from some cause...
Causes. Chemistry.
Ed67 writes:
...they could have come from an intelligent source
Well, if you think that all those Na and Cl ions need something intelligent to form salt crystals, you don't know much about chemistry.
Ed67 writes:
...as intelligence is known to be sufficient cause for the kind of instructions contained in the 'recipe' of DNA.
Really? Any evidence for that 'intelligence'?
DNA is chemistry.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Ed67, posted 04-22-2014 11:05 PM Ed67 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by Ed67, posted 04-23-2014 8:42 AM Pressie has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024