It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Chrisfishenstein
reply to post by xDeadcowx
There is zero supporting evidence for this God you trying to claim designed DNA and there is zero evidence to support DNA being designed in the first place.
Yeah Gut, don't you know this in depth DNA just went POOF out of nowhere? Everyone knows that something intelligent didn't make intelligent beings.....DUH....
/sarcasm
It's a headline that made me read it.
Had it read "There are transcription-factor binding sites inside axons", I probably wouldn't have bothered.
Transcription factor binding sites inside coding genes have been known about for decades, e.g. PMID 6299576 [PubMed]. In human cells they were described in large numbers 10 years ago.
It's interesting stuff but nowhere near as groundbreaking or "second code"-like as the article makes it out to be. I don't want to seem like I don't appreciate this research because it really is interesting and will probably help fill in the inconsistencies in some protein models.
I'm just disappointed in the article. Though it is the institutes article so they obviously want to hype up their research.
... it has been obvious for a long while that pretty much all parts of the genome are open to having regulatory roles in gene expression...
I don't see what the big deal is. Everyone who knows anything looks for regulatory regions everywhere along a gene, regardless of whether the regions are coding or not.
There is nothing novel here at all.
The "second code" has been known for a long time, and unfortunately both the paper and the press release sensationalize this "discovery" by ignoring all previous work, such as this paper.
The University of Washington--UoW being an academic institution--has chosen words such as, "meaning," "code," "write," and "instructions' as descriptors in the linked article.
Those are suggestive and heavy-duty words. You shouldn't need as much of a lesson on their impact as you seem to on the definition of oxymoron---though I could be wrong on that. Read 'em again if you're still lost. It'll hit ya.
Philosophically--and with Occam's in mind--I would further proffer that the idea that this particular and most spectacular of creative forces--DNA--stems from something less than "consciousness" is negated in that we don't even have--at least as far as the University of Washington is concerned--words that don't imply design when describing the theorem. Design, as you'll remember from above, suggests intelligence.
And we haven't even gotten to the added complexity of the "second language."
Oh…before I forget:
Although a true oxymoron is "something that is surprisingly true, a paradox," Garry Wills has argued that modern usage has brought a common misunderstanding[4] that oxymoron is nearly synonymous with contradiction.
en.wikipedia.org...
theantediluvian
8 em dashes in 7 sentences? I'd avoid being critical of other people's mastery of the English language if I were you.
Your argument, from what I could decipher, seems to be something along the lines of:
Anything that is designed by definition requires a designer.
design |dəˈzīn|
noun
1 a plan or drawing produced to show the look and function or workings of a building, garment, or other object before it is built or made : he has just unveiled his design for the new museum.
• the art or action of conceiving of and producing such a plan or drawing : good design can help the reader understand complicated information | the cloister is of late twelfth century design.
• an arrangement of lines or shapes created to form a pattern or decoration : pottery with a lovely blue and white design.
2 purpose, planning, or intention that exists or is thought to exist behind an action, fact, or material object : the appearance of design in the universe.
The 'ol teleological argument! Complexity does not infer design. Isn't the best design often the simplest?
elegant |ˈeləgənt|
adjective
pleasingly graceful and stylish in appearance or manner : she will look elegant in black | an elegant, comfortable house.
• (of a scientific theory or solution to a problem) pleasingly ingenious and simple : the grand unified theory is compact and elegant in mathematical terms.
Yeah Gut, don't you know this in depth DNA just went POOF out of nowhere? Everyone knows that something intelligent didn't make intelligent beings.....DUH....
/sarcasm
You will one day understand that God did make all life on Earth...Sorry if that day isn't today and I am not here to sway you that way...
God bless
Lucid Lunacy
Yeah Chrisfishenstein, 'poofing out of nowhere' is not how evolutionary processes work nor how people familiar with it have been saying it happens. It only "poofs" out of nowhere to you, and others, that have no real understanding of it. Duh.
Hopefully you will one day understand this. Sorry if that's not today.
I would say that to produce the range and complexity of a human being, the DNA design is as simple and elegant as possible.
'Elegant' both compliments and supersedes simplicity. Meaning the "simplest' design doesn't negate complexity and most oft--in this sense--refers to efficacy and efficiency.
Why do you always need to find subtlety, successive layers and alternate explanations...? Why can't you be satisfied with the simple truth -?-?- It is - what it - is. Before you know it, we'll be finding conspiracies under every rock and crawl space.
reply to post by soficrow
GREAT find. Now I'm wondering about the relationship between epigenetic mechanisms and this hidden code.
You do know that "poofing out of nowhere'" ... also known as "The Big Bang" ... is the current scientific belief right?
Is this true?! Would we now have to embrace intelligent design if we're intellectually honest?
gort51
What if Atoms are actually intelligent beings, and construct their own dna strings, and fool around with creation?
What if the Atoms, are the G:heys.
We exist only in a Dimension of space and time, to suit the Atoms.
Can only an Atomic Bomb kill Atoms?
Does an Atom live for infinity.
Hail to the Atom!!
reply to post by The GUT
The University of Washington--UoW being an academic institution--has chosen words such as, "meaning," "code," "write," and "instructions' as descriptors in the linked article.
neoholographic
This is just more evidence of intelligent design.
Gene regulation and control clearly shows that we were designed by intelligence. This can be an intelligent God or intelligence is fundamental to reality. There's really no way around this conclusion and this has been true for many years now.
What intelligent design is saying is that intelligence arranged the DNA letters to convey a specific message. This is what intelligence does. Intelligence can arrange raw materials to convey a specific message.
For instance, you can look at scrambled letters of the alphabet and intelligence can take letters from the alphabet and spell out Meet me at the corner store on Hayden Avenue. This arrangement of the alphabet is predetermined by intelligence to convey a message.
We can convey a message with cereal boxes in the garbage.
If the box of Cheerios is outside of the garbage meet me at Subway across the street. If the box of Captain Crunch is outside of the garbage then meet me at Mr. Hero across the street. In order to accept a natural interpretation of evolution you would have to believe that evolution not put the box of cereal outside of the garbage but also created the message to meet me at Subway or Mr. Hero.
It goes deeper than that because the box of cereal (DNA Letters) have to be arranged in a specific way for things like transcription, translation, error correction and gene regulation to occur. This arrangement has to be predetermined by intelligence.
Look at insertion and deletion. When a specific arrangement of DNA letters are inserted gene regulation and expression is turned on. It's like turning on a light switch. When you hit the switch, a specific arrangement designed by intelligence occurs and the lights come on.
The more we learn about DNA, it becomes more obvious that we were designed by intelligence. These things don't evolve. This predetermined arrangement controls and regulates the evolution. Just like a predetermined arrangement controls and regulates your TV or microwave oven.
We have to be a reflection of this intelligence because we do the same thing. We can put raw materials in a predetermined state to convey a message and give it meaning. We can understand the prearranged meaning or Word inherent in the universe.edit on 13-12-2013 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)