A question for Athiests/Evolutionists. (re: How can one not belive in something greater than himself? et all)

quote:

---

As DNA is a CODE, similar in some ways to computer codes,

---

How is DNA like computer codes?It is certainly nothing at all like a computer program.

quote:

---

but which is far more complex, in process, function and results.

---

How is it far more complex, exactly?

Yes.First of all, the two are called CODES (see definition of CODE below). That is the most basic similarity. Second of all, the genetic code contains COMMANDS and computer codes contain COMMANDS, and the commands are made by symbols (0,1 for computers; four nucleotides for DNA) being arranged in a meaningful way. Thirdly, there is an environment and complex system in place (operating system for the computer; cell and its various systems for the DNA) in which the code is translated and the commands carried out.Here's some interesting information from a highschool textbook Biological Science: A Molecular Approach (Heath, 6th ed. ~ it's BSCS approved, too.)This text book, under the heading Coding Genetic information, says:

quote:

---

[R]esearchers [have] cracked the molecular code of life, now known as the genetic code. These researchers were able to attach meaning to "words" made from the nucleotide alphabet. (p. 223)

---

The next paragraph starts off with the DEFINITION OF CODE:

quote:

---

A code is a system of symbols used to store information. (p. 223)

---

quote:

---

Although molecules of DNA may be very long, they are made of varying sequences of only four nucleotides. Thus the nucleotides serve as four "letters" of the DNA "alphabet."...A genetic code would require at least 20 different messages ~ one for each amino acid (p. 224)

---

Eventually the book gets to the idea that DNA code "words" are groups of three nucleotides. A nucleotide triplet is called a "codon" and can code for a certain amino acid (to be attached next) and commands like "start" and "stop." There are even synonyms: two or more different codons that have the same meaning. (pp. 224-225)DNA strands have an area called the "coding sequence region." (p. 229)We also find words like "transcription" and "translated" all used in relation to DNA in this chapter.As to how DNA is more complex than a computer program, consider the space occupied by the DNA in one organism (for instance, a human). The DNA is the data required to build and maintain that human (a tremendous amount of data ~ it codes for YOUR brain, as well, and YOUR brain is a tremendous structure). Computer code uses two symbols (0, 1) to accomplish tasks such as printing, controlling the monitor, making various sounds, and word processing. The data required to operate and control a computer (relative to the data of human DNA) is very small and takes up a lot of space (i.e., the harddrive)). DNA uses four symbols (four nucleotides), and by proper sequencing of these four symbols (human DNA) is able to build and maintain a human being. The data required to do this is tremendous and all the DNA in a human adult (which is really just the same DNA code in every cell somehow able to utilize different areas of the DNA depending upon location in the body?) takes up just a few teaspoons (so I hear). The output of DNA (a living human being) is greater than the output of any computer (printed spreadsheets, 3d video games, etc.) and the amount of data is greater and the data is stored in a much smaller area.I wish I knew more about DNA. But that is a good (if blathering) stab at your questions.This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 11-28-2004 02:55 PM

So very far off topic. If you wish to discuss this take it to a more appropriate thread.

It IS a bit adrift.Sorry.

Thanks for recognizing that.There have been a whole series of threads on that. Have a look in the Intelligent Design forum I think. I don't have time to search for it right now.

I'm rather new to BBs. When you see a sub-discussion going off-topic, what is a proper way to handle that?Is it to make your post in an appropriate thread and leave a link in the other thread with an invitation to visit the link?(that is my first thought).This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 11-28-2004 04:12 PM

That is an excellent way to handle it.We all wander off topic all the time. It is the nature of the interlinked things being discussed. Anyone who sees that happening should comment on it and suggest dropping it or taking it to an appropriate place.If we don't keep things a bit focussed it makes it very hard for those coming along later to follow things. It also means that things never reach anywhere, they just wander.

Thanks.

quote:

---

In particular, the existence of DNA is, in my mind, a profound evidence that a Creator exists. As DNA is a CODE, similar in some ways to computer codes, but which is far more complex, in process, function and results. Morse Code was invented by Mr. Morse, and the genetic code that eventually produced Mr. Morse (Human DNA) was invented by life's Creator.

---

Rubbish. Computer programme code works regardless of intervention. DNA works regardless of intervention. There is no need to postulate a creator for the origin of the code, because the code would execute just as well whether deliberately designed or accidentally assembled. This is support for evolution, not creation.

Contracycle,I'm glad you consider this topic interesting.I'm afraid, as has been pointed out, that it is too off-topic for this thread, which concerns how atheists get along without believing in a higher power.For those interested, my response to Contracycle can be found by clicking on this link:
http://EvC Forum: Evolution of complexity/informationThis message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 11-29-2004 04:41 PMThis message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 11-29-2004 04:44 PM

---

I Interpret Genesis literally.

Perfect!!!Thank you for helping with the difficult task of topic purity.

Clash, your faith is a very good example of an evolutionary advantage. The very fact that you take great comfort from your belief at all times makes it very unlikely that you will ever kill yourself. As a consequence, you are more likely to reproduce and keep your genes in the pool.

It was comments, such as this one by Scrafinator, that prompted my posting at all on the subject that the existence of matter demonstrates clearly that there is a Creator.I do agree that a detailed discussion of DNA belongs elsewhere, though .That there is a Creator is abundantly clear, and true science has only implied it more and more as it has investigated the tremendous complexity within us and about us.This message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 11-29-2004 10:49 AMThis message has been edited by TheLiteralist, 11-29-2004 11:11 AM

AdminNosy,You're quite welcome.

Some in this thread have mentioned the "comfort" that must come from believing in God.Being a believer, specifically a believer in the God of the Bible, I have found both comfort and discomfort (fear) from my faith.When life is overwhelming, it is comforting to know that God is watching or that He listens and answers prayers (I was miraculously and instantly healed of a fractured hip joint, for instance), but there is also the knowledge that He doesn't always spare people, even righteous people, from the tragedies that can occur in this life due to physical circumstances, or more especially, violent, selfish people. The Bible is clear about this in many ways. The only source of comfort in many cases is the fact that God will judge all men at a future date (Judgement Day).Fear comes when I consider myself to be disobedient to God. Fear of hell can be maddening at times. So, I don't think the "it's a source of comfort" idea works completely.