How does nature evolve instructions to stop and start?

You have Codons that start and stop in DNA. It instructs where the DNA letters of a gene start and stop. It's like if I say I want you to read a passage in a book and I marked where the passage starts and where it stops.

I can see how intelligence can do this but how did the ability to start and stop at the precise points where instructions will be transcribed and how does the ability to know where these places to start and stop evolve naturally?

I know I have seen this before when I design a website and I'm writing code.

Furthermore, 97% of your DNA is commented out. DNA is linear and read from start to end. The parts that should not be decoded are marked very clearly, much like C comments. The 3% that is used directly form the so called 'exons'. The comments, that come 'inbetween' are called 'introns'.

These comments are fascinating in their own right. Like C comments they have a start marker, like /*, and a stop marker, like */. But they have some more structure. Remember that DNA is like a tape - the comments need to be snipped out physically! The start of a comment is almost always indicated by the letters 'GT', which thus corresponds to /*, the end is signalled by 'AG', which is then like */.

ds9a.nl...

So exactly, how can instructions to stop and start evolve naturally and the ability to know where to stop and start?

a reply to: neoholographic

Biological triggers all have sequences to stop and start. For instance, RNA synthase will continue along the template until it encounters a signal to tell it to stop. The signal can be rho-dependent or rho-independent. Stop and start has been well elucidated in biochemistry.

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

I am not sure what your asking. I did quite a bit of research on DNA and epigenetics over the last six years or so and took some free university classes on it . Methylation is involved in this, but I cannot generalize it easily because it is complicated.


I tend to be lost as to how position in the body can trigger a certain cell type, like the liver usually being in the same spot in us, even when a few cells come together to form a new person, why are the organs mostly always in the same area? It is lucky we all don't die from cells being in the wrong spot. Although, I do know lots of people who got their head up their a$$ and they keep on going like the energizer bunny.

a reply to: Phantom423

You said:

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

Wow, that really explains it!

I'm not asking for opinion.

Show me the published papers that show exactly how nature evolved the ability to instruct where transcription starts and stops and how it evolved to know where to start and stop.

How did it evolve the ability to transcribe and translate?

I don't want opinion, show me the published papers that establish this so I can read exactly how nature accomplished this.

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Phantom423

You said:

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

Wow, that really explains it!

I'm not asking for opinion.

Show me the published papers that show exactly how nature evolved the ability to instruct where transcription starts and stops and how it evolved to know where to start and stop.

How did it evolve the ability to transcribe and translate?

I don't want opinion, show me the published papers that establish this so I can read exactly how nature accomplished this.

You are just going to have to accept Phantom knows everything and you can’t question the natural
Phantom knows his science, knows his stuff does our phantom

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

That comment sounds very sciencie and very authoritive, that sells it for me, I am a believer, evolution is a fact, it’s factual and there is no need for scientific evidence

I have a feeling Neohol you won’t be getting much in the way of common sense never mind science from this thread.

Very interesting non the less. Not only reading code but knowing when to stop and start following the design of the code, pretty incredible

a reply to: Raggedyman

Certainly not form your post, at least...

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Phantom423

You said:

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

Wow, that really explains it!

I'm not asking for opinion.

Show me the published papers that show exactly how nature evolved the ability to instruct where transcription starts and stops and how it evolved to know where to start and stop.

How did it evolve the ability to transcribe and translate?

I don't want opinion, show me the published papers that establish this so I can read exactly how nature accomplished this.

Quoted for hilarity.

Science has just gotten around to figuring out a tiny part of our DNA, doesn't understand anything about consciousness or how our brain actually functions besides some of the biological basics.

YOU, however, see fit to demand studies that can tell you exactly what you want to know from... members on a forum.

How about YOU do that yourself?

You have an internet connection, a semi-working brain and an attitude, so why figure it out for yourself sparky?

And for the record, most of our current scientific findings are, in fact...

An opinion. A theory. A possibility.

Phantom gave you an answer.

Deal with it.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: Phantom423

You said:

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

Wow, that really explains it!

I'm not asking for opinion.

Show me the published papers that show exactly how nature evolved the ability to instruct where transcription starts and stops and how it evolved to know where to start and stop.

How did it evolve the ability to transcribe and translate?

I don't want opinion, show me the published papers that establish this so I can read exactly how nature accomplished this.

You are just going to have to accept Phantom knows everything and you can’t question the natural
Phantom knows his science, knows his stuff does our phantom

The signals evolve just like everything else - whatever was necessary for survival, it developed naturally.

That comment sounds very sciencie and very authoritive, that sells it for me, I am a believer, evolution is a fact, it’s factual and there is no need for scientific evidence

I have a feeling Neohol you won’t be getting much in the way of common sense never mind science from this thread.

Very interesting non the less. Not only reading code but knowing when to stop and start following the design of the code, pretty incredible

Exactly!

It's really a simple question and you would think those who say evolution occurred naturally would be able to easily point me to the published paper that supports this.

I was doing a crossword puzzle the other day and there was a bunch of letters in a square and my intelligence knew where to spot a word, take my pen, START at the beginning of the word, draw a line and STOP at the end of the word.

If nature has randomly and naturally evolved this amazing ability and can transcribe then translate these instructions then there should be people pointing me to the published studies that shows how nature blindly evolved these amazing features.

You hear words like start, stop, codes, instructions, transcription and translation all the time in literature about computers. If nature managed to evolve these things, I want to see the published study so I can look over this amazing step by step process.

a reply to: neoholographic

Isn't it more like triggers, If Then Else Do Loop End Loop basic format?

If Carcinogen A > X
Then Cancerous_Tumor = Y
Else
If Carcinogen A < X
etc..

Loops to make cells, end loop because age range reached, cellular form reached

Wow, thought-provoking post op.

I personally was not aware of the "commented out" DNA, not sure if that is the same as what has previously been referred to as junk DNA or not.

In any case, the only way you could have comments in our traditional code is, of course, to have another underlying language. With our code that is of course binary.

If the DNA is, in fact, the base level code and we are dealing with 4 different states, we need to work out what those other 2 states are. Binary ofcourse refers back to the on/off of the switch. If we now have 2 other states, I would guess one of those is half on half off, but I have no idea what the other would be.

Maybe my thought process is wrong above. After all, DNA is effectively a 3d instruction set, where our traditional code is 2d. So maybe the fundamental switch follows the same nature/principles and the 4 base values are actually more like coordinates in a 3d space. It is possible the pattern runs in multiple directions too, which would mean we may actually have more than the 4 obvious base values. I am in way over my head here but hope the concept is conveyed.

a reply to: Lumenari

Actually Lums, phantom offered an opinion about something he hasn’t a clue about, was definitely not an answer

And if people are going to claim science then use science not opinion and faith based esoteric science religion psychobabble

You better deal with evolution being a new religion for the mindless faithful atheist

a reply to: byteshertz

Very good questions and conversations about DNA can sound like conversations in a class on computer programming.

For instance, we know some of what's called Junk DNA regulates the expression and suppression of a coding DNA. Think about that. It "regulates the expression." Intelligence does this all the time. How did nature evolve this ability to regulate the expression of a coding sequence?

Also, some of the non coding DNA that regulates the expression is more conserved than the coding sequence that's being expressed.

When you get a computer, if it has Windows there's folders on Windows that regulate the expression of the operating system. If you try to open one of these folders, you get a message that says if you mess with the code you can damage your operating system. In fact, some diseases are caused because of damage to these non coding sequences that regulate expression.

To me, it makes no sense to say this occurred naturally. It had to be encoded by intelligence.

Intelligence can encode sequence with meaning. This information can then be decoded. This is how we have built civilizations.

I can take a green cup, blue cup and purple cup and encode it's sequence with information that has meaning. I can say in a sequence from left to right, if you see the blue cup first and the purple cup last with the green cup in the middle, then meet me at Subway on MLK.

I can also say, if the if the green cup is first, the purple cup second and the blue cup last, meet me At Taco Bell Downtown on 10th. Street.

I have encoded information in the sequence of cups that can be decoded either by intelligence or I can build a program that reads the sequence.

I can add a black cup, yellow cup and orange cup and say the sequence starts when you see the blue cup and stops when you see the purple cup. So I can have all six cups in a row and the sequence is hidden among the black, yellow and orange cup.

How could you know when the sequence starts and stops without intelligence?

DNA letters are ACGT for adenine, cytosine, guanine, thymine. The information is encoded by intelligence in the sequence of these DNA letters.

Scientific Materialist wants people to believe that adenine, cytosine, guanine and thymine encoded itself with information. That's just asinine. That's like saying the cups encoded the sequence of the cups with information and then used the black, yellow and orange cups to regulate the expression of the sequence.

NUTS!!

DNA is clear evidence of intelligent design.

The sequence of objects or symbols don't have any meaning unless intelligence gives it meaning. This symbol * and this symbol / isn't encoded with any information. When intelligence says the sequence */ and /* has start and stop functions for what we will call C comments, then intelligence has encoded these symbols with information.

Again, / and * don't encode their sequence with information that can be decoded any more than ACTG can in DNA.

The sequence has to be encoded with information by intelligence.

a reply to: neoholographic

Your asking a question of the unknown and expect an answer, let's put it another way, ask these two questions first, what is nature? Is it conscious?

originally posted by: neoholographic
You have Codons that start and stop in DNA. It instructs where the DNA letters of a gene start and stop. It's like if I say I want you to read a passage in a book and I marked where the passage starts and where it stops.

I can see how intelligence can do this but how did the ability to start and stop at the precise points where instructions will be transcribed and how does the ability to know where these places to start and stop evolve naturally?

I know I have seen this before when I design a website and I'm writing code.

Furthermore, 97% of your DNA is commented out. DNA is linear and read from start to end. The parts that should not be decoded are marked very clearly, much like C comments. The 3% that is used directly form the so called 'exons'. The comments, that come 'inbetween' are called 'introns'.

These comments are fascinating in their own right. Like C comments they have a start marker, like /*, and a stop marker, like */. But they have some more structure. Remember that DNA is like a tape - the comments need to be snipped out physically! The start of a comment is almost always indicated by the letters 'GT', which thus corresponds to /*, the end is signalled by 'AG', which is then like */.

ds9a.nl...

So exactly, how can instructions to stop and start evolve naturally and the ability to know where to stop and start?

Motion...vibration...sound....are like plants and sunlight.....if everything else is in place and you add sunlight you have growing plants.Assemble the ingredients...add the activator...and wha la....transpermia at its best.

a reply to: neoholographic

Sure does make one think, huh?

I wish I was so brilliant that I had an answer for you. I don't.

Science is great stuff. I salute those dedicating their efforts to it. But we are fledglings when it comes to the nuts and bolts of the universe. Long way to go.

Yes. All you need to do is start thinking for yourself, and critically analyzing the necessary mechanisms of evolution and you will realize it is impossible.

As if the start/stop codons were not difficult enough to be put in the right place by random mutations, these entire gene-coding sequences need to be regulated by higher homeostatic controls. In other words, if these protein-coding gene sequences are not regulated, they will make too few or too many proteins and the organism will be much worse off than before. So even if the start/stop codons by miracle find their way to the correct spot in a sequence that somehow manages to do something useful, it still needs higher regulatory mechanisms to keep it in check, otherwise it will likely become malignant and express the gene improperly.

originally posted by: Lumenari

An opinion. A theory. A possibility.

The problem comes when said theories are touted as fact in the school system, making people believe they are ancestors of mutant monkeys... leading them to all sorts of nihilist meaningless conclusions. Neo posed a rhetorical question, because it is not meant to be answered (because there is no answer, because evolution is impossible by conventional means). This is one of the countless unanswerable conundrums that evolution faces. Evolution involves a step-by-step mutative change to the genome, yet due to the interdepedence of all faculties of the body, a step-by-step addition to function is impossible.

logic and creativity combined is

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: byteshertz

Very good questions and conversations about DNA can sound like conversations in a class on computer programming.

For instance, we know some of what's called Junk DNA regulates the expression and suppression of a coding DNA. Think about that. It "regulates the expression." Intelligence does this all the time. How did nature evolve this ability to regulate the expression of a coding sequence?

Also, some of the non coding DNA that regulates the expression is more conserved than the coding sequence that's being expressed.

When you get a computer, if it has Windows there's folders on Windows that regulate the expression of the operating system. If you try to open one of these folders, you get a message that says if you mess with the code you can damage your operating system. In fact, some diseases are caused because of damage to these non coding sequences that regulate expression.

To me, it makes no sense to say this occurred naturally. It had to be encoded by intelligence.

Intelligence can encode sequence with meaning. This information can then be decoded. This is how we have built civilizations.

I can take a green cup, blue cup and purple cup and encode it's sequence with information that has meaning. I can say in a sequence from left to right, if you see the blue cup first and the purple cup last with the green cup in the middle, then meet me at Subway on MLK.

I can also say, if the if the green cup is first, the purple cup second and the blue cup last, meet me At Taco Bell Downtown on 10th. Street.

I have encoded information in the sequence of cups that can be decoded either by intelligence or I can build a program that reads the sequence.

I can add a black cup, yellow cup and orange cup and say the sequence starts when you see the blue cup and stops when you see the purple cup. So I can have all six cups in a row and the sequence is hidden among the black, yellow and orange cup.

How could you know when the sequence starts and stops without intelligence?

DNA letters are ACGT for adenine, cytosine, guanine, thymine. The information is encoded by intelligence in the sequence of these DNA letters.

Scientific Materialist wants people to believe that adenine, cytosine, guanine and thymine encoded itself with information. That's just asinine. That's like saying the cups encoded the sequence of the cups with information and then used the black, yellow and orange cups to regulate the expression of the sequence.

NUTS!!

DNA is clear evidence of intelligent design.

The sequence of objects or symbols don't have any meaning unless intelligence gives it meaning. This symbol * and this symbol / isn't encoded with any information. When intelligence says the sequence */ and /* has start and stop functions for what we will call C comments, then intelligence has encoded these symbols with information.

Again, / and * don't encode their sequence with information that can be decoded any more than ACTG can in DNA.

The sequence has to be encoded with information by intelligence.

I get it mate, we are definitely on the same wavelength on that. I don't follow a religion but I have always believed in intelligent design, it is the only thing that makes sense to me.

Everywhere I look, I see order, I see design, I see code- all of the unfathomable complexity and balance. I don't have proof for those who don't see it, if the patterns like the ones described in this thread are not going to convince someone, I don't know what will and I don't really mind to be honest. They can call it faith, they can call it ignorance but for me to not trust the patterns I see showing me intelligent design would require faith and ignorance.

a reply to: neoholographic

You can see how intelligence did it, but blindly deny natural mechanisms? Come on bro. Writing computer code is not the equivalent of DNA experiencing mutations and changes to the code/structure of DNA itself. I can't see how intelligent did that, it makes no sense at all, you have to blindly assume that because it's complicated, it can't arise naturally and that's a bad assumption to make. You have to assume that this other intelligence exists, with zero supporting evidence, yet attack naturalism. Your bias is clearly showing here because you don't hold your view to the same standards. You treat it like the default, because .... computer code. No scrutiny at all....

Show me the published papers that show exactly how nature evolved the ability to instruct where transcription starts and stops and how it evolved to know where to start and stop.

So dishonest. Show me the published papers that show exactly how a higher intelligence ever created or designed anything in the history of the universe. LMAO!!! You are using the tireless, "we don't know everything, therefor we know nothing" argument. It's illogical. Where is your evidence supporting ID? Oh wait....

originally posted by: Barcs
Writing computer code is not the equivalent of DNA experiencing mutations and changes to the code/structure of DNA itself.

Yet you use the word "code" to describe both of the processes.