Well...the automatons of ancient days would beat that by millenia.
The point here is: as above, so below. You cannot derive something wthin the universe does not already exist. The form of the universe itself
influences how the things within it function.
DNA is a programming language.
Frequency is, too, in an abstract sense. Its a small difference between photon and electron, right?
Even more: humans cannot know something that they haven't already glimpsed. We will be limited to knowing that which is in our universe already.
And, added on to this, we will tend to use what we know to pigeonhole new information. So you end up with DNA being called "a programming language",
originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: whereislogic
The form of the universe itself influences how the things within it function.
That sounds a bit like the way of thinking described in the thread that is quoting Jeremy England in the "Origins and Creationism" subforum who uses
the word "inevitable" (except he's more directly addressing the origin of a specific thing in the universe, life, rather than only talking about "how
things...function"; he's actually extremely reluctant to share any useful detailed information as to how life really functions, something to be
considered when talking about the subject of the origin of life and also done a lot by people like Jack Szostak when talking about the same subject
and quickly skipping past or dismissing the facts of life that matter regarding this subject in an effort to make his story sound more plausible to a
biased hearer, by dismissing the need for numerous interdependent functionalities in a living cell; interdependent in relation to their
functionality of reproduction and the passing on of genes).
I made a comment in an attempt to remind people how this particular
notion of the universe or (Mother) Nature, or the laws of nature being geared or predestinated towards the production of functional biomolecular
machinery was repudiated by the same scientists who proposed it under the terms "by necessity" and "Self-Organization Scenarios" because of what they
discovered as they followed this particular line or way of thinking.
Oh btw, one of the scientists I'm talking about above who popularized that way of thinking about "biochemical predestination", the one who changed his
mind after publishing the book about that subject, is the Professor Emeritus of Biology at San Francisco State University named Dean Kenyon.
In 1969, Kenyon co-authored Biochemical Predestination with Gary Steinman.
Kenyon states that his views changed around 1976...
And also btw, we're still on the exact same subject as the video with Dr. Stephen Meyer that I shared with Phantom423. It won't go away by people like
Jeremy England repeating the philosophy/idea (using a cunning variation to obscure that) that one of the 2 that popularized it has already repudiated
based on his findings as he was studying that philosophy/idea or way of thinking. And not that complicated to understand why that philosophy isn't
true or way of thinking is incorrect and illogical. Of course, still easy to ignore if one wants to think a certain way without actually thinking it
through based on an emotional commitment to something other than knowledge, logic and reason.
And one last thing, all these terms including the one quoted from a prominent evolutionist by Michael Behe in the video below at 30:54, "chance and
necessity" boil down to one core philosophy and way of thinking that I quoted from Phantom423:
Based on "no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations" A.K.A. just-so and
maybe-so stories, i.e. myths/false stories. According to those who propose or claim "Nature...did it."
edit on 25-4-2016 by whereislogic because: addition
You're letting your imagination get carried away a bit together with neoholographic. Let's try to get some accurate genome sequences first (very
important in medicine, to get it right, especially when looking at lots of bases). Don't overestimate next-Gen sequencing techniques, that's all I'll
say about it cause it's a long story that you're probably not interested in anyway.
How long until we're able to use a 3D printer to create living cells? I mean, you'd still want to implant a nucleus to give it a kick start, but
could the architecture of the cell be created from scratch, then given a Frankenstein jolt of electrc once the nucleus is added?
I realise I'm not being very scientific, but heck, they could 3D print a kidney three years ago...
Some smart person will no doubt be coming up with new sicknesses and then profiting off of it's cure right after it's released into the wild.
Like the Zika virus? No way on God's green earth that's a naturally occurring virus. It's either entirely manmade, or it's been enhanced by a
super-villain. The globalist stink is all over it, especially the persistent & lobbied-for media attention/ hyperbole about relocating the Olympics,
edit on MayTuesday1615CDT12America/Chicago-050050 by FlyInTheOintment because: spelling, clarification
Really??? What makes you say that??? The part about it being modified or enhanced specifically.
The media hype is pretty standard. They always are up for causing more panic. This is the first I've heard about them moving the Olympics. I knew
they were talking about it but didn't realize they decided to do it. But moving the Olympics needed to happen anyway. They were not even close to
being prepared for it.
originally posted by: RedDragon
And some people here think aliens are abducting us for our genetic codes or something biological. Looool
Having just made a comment about an overload of information through
speculation and philosophizing (and spreading or promoting those philosophies using specific patterns related to agnosticism or selective
agnosticism), then reading some comments about the media going on about re-location of the Olympics (last few comments in this thread), then reading
your comment makes me think of the philosophy that 'Aliens did it' (regarding the subject of the origin of biomolecular machinery I shortly discussed
here with Phantom423, which he claimed "Nature...did it") and this video (where someone is also basically saying the same thing when talking about
what others such as David Icke, also popular on ATS, have referred to as the Reptilians). At 2:20:
Pardon the misquotations (by replacing God's name with "the Lord" for example) in the video below:
Note also which type of threads get the most flags on ATS. Some examples:
"Remote viewing & UFOs : Stargate, Galactic Federation + the Aviary" [speculation about aliens again, yay]
"Hello, I'm David Icke, Ask Me Anything" [nuff said, yay Reptilians]
"SETI: On the Verge of a Breakthrough?" [yay, speculating about aliens again, while the evidence for extraterrestial intelligence is right under their
"Roswell - New scans of the Ramey Memo : Can it now be enhanced/deciphered?"
"Badajoz ravine - aliens, nazis and paranormal activity"
"Teenager Makes Link Between Constellations and Position of Mayan Cities" [well, it would fit in a novel about the universe or space at least]
And it didn't take long for someone to bring up "area 51" in the thread:
"We are Stuff They Don't Want You to Know - Ask Us Anything"
All those threads are taken from the front page of ATS in the list with the "Top Topics: 1 Year". 7 out of 15. Enjoy the box ATS has set up for you
cause it can't fight human behaviour as a whole, only profit of it (see also 2
Timothy 4:3,4 and the phrases "give attention to" and "according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with
edit on 18-6-2016 by whereislogic because: (no reason given)
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.