How does nature evolve instructions to stop and start?

originally posted by: cooperton

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.

Yet you repeat the same lie that evolution is impossible when you have never once refuted a single piece of evidence ever, you just continually appeal to unknowns and use it as a primary argument ignoring all evidence.

A code is not a process LOL! Your equivocation is hilarious!

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: cooperton

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.

Yet you repeat the same lie that evolution is impossible when you have never once refuted a single piece of evidence ever, you just continually appeal to unknowns and use it as a primary argument ignoring all evidence.

A code is not a process LOL! Your equivocation is hilarious!

Directed evolution.....is the correct term.....evolution within set patterns or boundaries....boundries akin the the Flower of Life.www.ka-gold-jewelry.com...

originally posted by: byteshertz

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.

I agree. Intelligent Design is the only thing that makes sense.

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: cooperton

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.

Yet you repeat the same lie that evolution is impossible when you have never once refuted a single piece of evidence ever, you just continually appeal to unknowns and use it as a primary argument ignoring all evidence.

A code is not a process LOL! Your equivocation is hilarious!

Directed evolution.....is the correct term.....evolution within set patterns or boundaries....boundries akin the the Flower of Life.www.ka-gold-jewelry.com...

Except there is zero evidence that evolution is directed.

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: byteshertz

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.

I agree. Intelligent Design is the only thing that makes sense.

LOL! ID has ZERO supporting evidence. Evolution has TONS upon TONS.

originally posted by: cooperton
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.

Very good post!

It's really simple, you have a medium and intelligence can encode information in the sequence of that medium. The intelligence that encoded DNA used this medium because of it's information storage capacity.

I can encode information on 3 rocks.

I can say if the 2nd rock is in a lower position than the 1st rock and the 3rd rock is in a lower position than the 2nd rock then call me on my home phone at 3 PM.

I can also say, if the 2nd rock is in a lower position than the 1st rock but the 3rd rock is in a higher position than the 2nd rock then call me at 5 PM on my cell phone.

The rocks are just the medium intelligence uses to encode information that can be decoded by intelligence or if I write a program to decode.

In order to accept that evolution occurred naturally, you have to say the medium encoded it's own sequence with information. It also encoded a sequence that starts and stops at the beginning and end of the coded sequence and it encoded more information in non coding sequences (Junk DNA) that regulates the expression of coded sequences.

That's just asinine. It's impossible.

It's like saying the rocks put themselves in a sequence and encoded the sequence with information.

Adenine, cytosine, guanine and thymine is the medium that's used but intelligence had to encode it's sequence with information.

If you look at a simple way to bold part of your text. You will see [--] at the start then [/--] at the end of the text you want to be bold.

Of course, where the -- is at there will be a b. This is just the medium that intelligence encoded with information. These symbols and letters are meaningless by themselves when it comes to making a text bold. Saying DNA occurred naturally is like saying these symbols encoded information in a sequence the symbols came up with LOL.

In fact, intelligent could have chosen an h instead of a b so you would have a highlighted portion of the text. It would still work the same.

In fact we see this with synthetic DNA.

Scientists Have Created Synthetic DNA with 4 Extra Letters

The researchers crafted the synthetic DNA using four additional molecules, so that the resulting product had a code made up from eight letters rather than four. With the increase in letters, this DNA had, a much greater capacity to store information. Scientists called the new DNA "hachimoji" — meaning "eight letters" in Japanese — expanding on the previous work from different groups that had created similar DNA using six letters.

www.livescience.com...

Also, some Scientist are turning to things like Panpsychism because materialism makes no sense.

Minds Everywhere: 'Panpsychism' Takes Hold in Science

www.livescience.com...

Is the Universe Conscious?

Some of the world's most renowned scientists are questioning whether the cosmos has an inner life similar to our own.

www.nbcnews.com...

You have Penrose and Hameroff talking about protoconsciousness. Hoffman talking about conscious agents.

The Evolutionary Argument Against Reality

The cognitive scientist Donald Hoffman uses evolutionary game theory to show that our perceptions of an independent reality must be illusions.

www.quantamagazine.org...

At the end of the day, DNA tells us that Evolution is impossible without Intelligent Design encoding sequence with information.

originally posted by: neoholographic

At the end of the day, DNA tells us that Evolution is impossible without Intelligent Design encoding sequence with information.

Even guided evolution has no compelling evidence at this point. An intelligence with the capability to create life likely would have made things the way they are, rather than relying on billions of years of chaos. If you look at the empirical evidence, and not just the unbased claims of the scientists, you will realize the entire narrative is a house of cards. Take for example the supposed apes evolving from old world monkeys approx 25-30 million years ago. They claim it so confidently, yet the evidence is so sparse that the best they could show me was a partial jaw fragment from an unidentified animal. The materialist delusion is strong. Even worse they talk as if they have mounds of evidence, but ask for the nitty gritty observable things that prove their ideas and you'll find they are lacking.

I feel responsible to help clear the materialist fog preventing people from realizing deeper and more fundamental truths. Just like quantum physics rendered Newton's physics obsolete, so too does consciousness/energy have a deeper foundation than matter. All matter is super dense energy, according to E = mc2, so it is asburd to somehow insist that matter is the reason for all things, when it is subject to more fundamental realities, as demonstrated by quantum physics as well.

I like your thread. The best part is that you could do this with literally any part of biology. Get specific and ask the question, how could evolution have made this particular property? Just like the electron transport chain. It has 4 massive quaternary proteins and a necessary lipid bilayer allowing a buildup of an electrochemical gradient to spin a turbine on ATP synthase to create energy... It is literally a microscopic power plant. So how could a piece-by-piece mutation create the proteins for the electron transport chain, when all of the pieces are necessary for its functioning?? Let alone how difficult it would be to randomly get one of the subset proteins to just one of the quaternary proteins!! the smallest subunit protein for ATP synthase has 4737 base pairs... how could 4737 successful mutations occur?? And even that is not enough to even make one of the quaternary proteins in the electron transport chain.

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: cooperton

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.

Yet you repeat the same lie that evolution is impossible when you have never once refuted a single piece of evidence ever, you just continually appeal to unknowns and use it as a primary argument ignoring all evidence.

A code is not a process LOL! Your equivocation is hilarious!

Directed evolution.....is the correct term.....evolution within set patterns or boundaries....boundries akin the the Flower of Life.www.ka-gold-jewelry.com...

Except there is zero evidence that evolution is directed.

Not true.Everything in the Universe vibrates at frequency.There are parameters.This is direction,that is evidence.

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: one4all

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: cooperton

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.

Yet you repeat the same lie that evolution is impossible when you have never once refuted a single piece of evidence ever, you just continually appeal to unknowns and use it as a primary argument ignoring all evidence.

A code is not a process LOL! Your equivocation is hilarious!

Directed evolution.....is the correct term.....evolution within set patterns or boundaries....boundries akin the the Flower of Life.www.ka-gold-jewelry.com...

Except there is zero evidence that evolution is directed.

Not true.Everything in the Universe vibrates at frequency.There are parameters.This is direction,that is evidence.

Good point.

All is vibration.

This vibration is experience or what I call the protoconscious field of experience. Here's a recent article from Scientific American.

The Hippies Were Right: It's All about Vibrations, Man! A new theory of consciousness

Fast forward to the present era and we can ask ourselves now: Did the hippies actually solve this problem? My colleague Jonathan Schooler of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and I think they effectively did, with the radical intuition that it’s all about vibrations … man. Over the past decade, we have developed a “resonance theory of consciousness” that suggests that resonance—another word for synchronized vibrations—is at the heart of not only human consciousness but of physical reality more generally.

blogs.scientificamerican.com...

Let's repeat that again:

Fast forward to the present era and we can ask ourselves now: Did the hippies actually solve this problem? My colleague Jonathan Schooler of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and I think they effectively did, with the radical intuition that it’s all about vibrations … man. Over the past decade, we have developed a “resonance theory of consciousness” that suggests that resonance—another word for synchronized vibrations—is at the heart of not only human consciousness but of physical reality more generally.

Another Scientist who thought resonance was the key was Tesla. He said:

“If you want to find the secrets of the universe, think in terms of energy, frequency and vibration.”

Look at the growing field of Quantum Biology and things like the Quantum sense of smell. This is based on vibrations and quantum tunneling.



What this is saying is, we don't taste food, we smell it. This is why everything seems to taste the same when you have a bad cold and a stuffy nose.

Odor molecules from the food is converted to different vibrations which the brain converts into experience or qualia. When you think about this, it's truly amazing.

That meatball sub or chicken salad doesn't have any objective taste as a meatball sub or chicken salad but it's vibrations and quantum tunneling turned into an experience. This is the protoconscious field of experience.

This is why we like and dislike different foods. We all have different experiences when we eat these foods. We have 400 odor receptors in the nose but we can smell up to 10,000 different odors or so they thought. Check this out!

The human nose has roughly 400 types of scent receptors that can detect at least 1 trillion different odours. The human nose can distinguish at least 1 trillion different odours, a resolution orders of magnitude beyond the previous estimate of just 10,000 scents, researchers report today in Science.

www.nature.com...

WOW!!

An odor molecule reaches the scent receptors, then the frequency that it resonates determines it smell. So this means, everything you smell, the richness of new flowers to that meal at Olive Garden is due to vibrations and quantum tunneling and turning those vibrations into qualia or experience.

This leads us back to the conversation at hand. There's growing evidence that connects DNA to Quantum Biology.

Quantum Entanglement Holds DNA Together, Say Physicists

www.technologyreview.com...

DNA can discern between two quantum states, research shows

www.sciencedaily.com...

There's at least a base intelligence in the universe that directs these things. With things like the quantum sense of smell and DNA it becomes obvious.

With DNA, you clearly have a medium whose sequence is encoded with information. You can even use different nucleotide basis, even synthetic ones and get different storage capacity and encode the same information in it's sequence.

There's no way that the medium can encode information in it's sequence and regulate that information within non coding sequences without intelligence.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: neoholographic

At the end of the day, DNA tells us that Evolution is impossible without Intelligent Design encoding sequence with information.

Even guided evolution has no compelling evidence at this point. An intelligence with the capability to create life likely would have made things the way they are, rather than relying on billions of years of chaos. If you look at the empirical evidence, and not just the unbased claims of the scientists, you will realize the entire narrative is a house of cards. Take for example the supposed apes evolving from old world monkeys approx 25-30 million years ago. They claim it so confidently, yet the evidence is so sparse that the best they could show me was a partial jaw fragment from an unidentified animal. The materialist delusion is strong. Even worse they talk as if they have mounds of evidence, but ask for the nitty gritty observable things that prove their ideas and you'll find they are lacking.

I feel responsible to help clear the materialist fog preventing people from realizing deeper and more fundamental truths. Just like quantum physics rendered Newton's physics obsolete, so too does consciousness/energy have a deeper foundation than matter. All matter is super dense energy, according to E = mc2, so it is asburd to somehow insist that matter is the reason for all things, when it is subject to more fundamental realities, as demonstrated by quantum physics as well.

I like your thread. The best part is that you could do this with literally any part of biology. Get specific and ask the question, how could evolution have made this particular property? Just like the electron transport chain. It has 4 massive quaternary proteins and a necessary lipid bilayer allowing a buildup of an electrochemical gradient to spin a turbine on ATP synthase to create energy... It is literally a microscopic power plant. So how could a piece-by-piece mutation create the proteins for the electron transport chain, when all of the pieces are necessary for its functioning?? Let alone how difficult it would be to randomly get one of the subset proteins to just one of the quaternary proteins!! the smallest subunit protein for ATP synthase has 4737 base pairs... how could 4737 successful mutations occur?? And even that is not enough to even make one of the quaternary proteins in the electron transport chain.

Great points, especially that last point.

So how could a piece-by-piece mutation create the proteins for the electron transport chain, when all of the pieces are necessary for its functioning?? Let alone how difficult it would be to randomly get one of the subset proteins to just one of the quaternary proteins!! the smallest subunit protein for ATP synthase has 4737 base pairs... how could 4737 successful mutations occur?? And even that is not enough to even make one of the quaternary proteins in the electron transport chain.

They have no answer for these things and in many cases they admit there's no answer. It's not just unknown but it's impossible if you're claiming it occurred naturally.

They act like evidence that organisms evolved is evidence that they evolved naturally. Those are 2 different things.

originally posted by: neoholographic

They have no answer for these things and in many cases they admit there's no answer. It's not just unknown but it's impossible if you're claiming it occurred naturally.

They act like evidence that organisms evolved is evidence that they evolved naturally. Those are 2 different things.

Instead of God of the gaps, it's become naturalism of the gaps. Which is by far the less rational assumption. What is more likely to have created an ordered system: intelligence, or randomness? It's astronomically more likely that there was intelligence involved, especially since naturalism has no means of explaining the development of most microbiological complexities exhibited in even the most basic organism.

The thing is, if someone is persistently nihilist they will ignore the evidence right in front of their face. Like a fish that doesn't believe in water. I don't know what they want for evidence... the fact that DNA is code didn't do it, quantum physics didn't do it, patterns, irrational numbers in nature, interdependence of molecules/organelles/cells/tissues/organs/organ systems/organisms/and the environment as a whole with the sun being consistent enough to sustain life throughout the entirety of history. It's obvious to me now, but I was in the nihilist boat for a while so I can empathize.

The best part goes beyond the science. Learning how to feel and communicate with the Source Intelligence is the good/fun part, and the plan begins to reveal itself.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: neoholographic

They have no answer for these things and in many cases they admit there's no answer. It's not just unknown but it's impossible if you're claiming it occurred naturally.

They act like evidence that organisms evolved is evidence that they evolved naturally. Those are 2 different things.

Instead of God of the gaps, it's become naturalism of the gaps. Which is by far the less rational assumption. What is more likely to have created an ordered system: intelligence, or randomness? It's astronomically more likely that there was intelligence involved, especially since naturalism has no means of explaining the development of most microbiological complexities exhibited in even the most basic organism.

The thing is, if someone is persistently nihilist they will ignore the evidence right in front of their face. Like a fish that doesn't believe in water. I don't know what they want for evidence... the fact that DNA is code didn't do it, quantum physics didn't do it, patterns, irrational numbers in nature, interdependence of molecules/organelles/cells/tissues/organs/organ systems/organisms/and the environment as a whole with the sun being consistent enough to sustain life throughout the entirety of history. It's obvious to me now, but I was in the nihilist boat for a while so I can empathize.

The best part goes beyond the science. Learning how to feel and communicate with the Source Intelligence is the good/fun part, and the plan begins to reveal itself.

I like that, naturalism of the gaps. It's truly remarkable that this hoax that's a house of cards is taken seriously. Yes, organisms evolve but it's impossible for this to occur naturally.

There has to be a Source Intelligence as you say and more Scientist are starting to agree with this.

Spacetime Emergence, Panpsychism and the Nature of Consciousness

blogs.scientificamerican.com...

Panpsychism as an Observational Science

resonance.is...

Leading neuroscientists and Buddhists agree: “Consciousness is everywhere”

www.lionsroar.com...

A natural interpretation of evolution belongs in the Fantasy section.

originally posted by: one4all
Not true.Everything in the Universe vibrates at frequency.There are parameters.This is direction,that is evidence.

Even if that could be proved, it wouldn't show anything about direction at all, or evolution, sorry.

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: neoholographic

originally posted by: byteshertz

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.

I agree. Intelligent Design is the only thing that makes sense.

LOL! ID has ZERO supporting evidence. Evolution has TONS upon TONS.

Hey Barcs, can you show me some empirical evidence, just a gram of empirical evidence would be nice, a half gram a milligram, i dont need tons and tons

a reply to: Raggedyman

Already did ad nauseam. You don't read it or care about it, so why even ask for it? Last time I posted it, it was completely ignored and disregarded. Your shtick is old, just like Coop. You got no argument whatsover against the evidence, so you divert to talking crap instead of critical analysis.

a reply to: Barcs

That's a lie Barcs, it's always been a lie, so many people here and in the scientific fields know there is no empirical evidence
Ad nauseum, great choice of words, I can ask as much as I like ad nauseum because evolution is a faith and not a science

I have no argument against the scientific evidence because none exists

explorable.com...

You want to win the Internet. Post the empirical evidence and I go quiet.
Till then,M question evolution ad nauseum

a reply to: Phantom423

interesting post OP.

Going deeper down into the rabbit hole...

RNA synthase will continue along the template until it encounters a signal to tell it to stop.

"tell" - define "tell"? In what sense or manner the "signal" "tells" the RNA to stop?

How did "it- stop sign" know "it" was at a point to place the 'stop sign'?

a reply to: Raggedyman

scholar.google.com...

Pick any paper you want and refute it.

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: Raggedyman

scholar.google.com...

Pick any paper you want and refute it.

Don’t be childish barcs, you are arguing that hair colour, body size, anything that is a change is evolution, variations within a species is not the evolution you preaching
Change is not evolution, show me scientific evidence that more information is added to DNA, not that a brown haired person can have a blond baby

www.icr.org...
Microevolution refers to varieties within a given type. Change happens within a group, but the descendant is clearly of the same type as the ancestor. This might better be called variation, or adaptation, but the changes are "horizontal" in effect, not "vertical." Such changes might be accomplished by "natural selection," in which a trait within the present variety is selected as the best for a given set of conditions, or accomplished by "artificial selection," such as when dog breeders produce a new breed of dog.

The small or microevolutionary changes occur by recombining existing genetic material within the group. As Gregor Mendel observed with his breeding studies on peas in the mid 1800's, there are natural limits to genetic change.

A dog, no matter the size, shape or colour is a dog

Every single paper listed is a lie and not teaching evolution, teaching change all WITHIN ITS OWN KIND, variation
That is your lie barcs
Show me species evolving by adding more DNA code from nowhere?

A dog growing thicker, longer hair is not evolution, it’s adaptation within. The DNA code exists
Asian eyes, Caucasian eyes is not evolution, it’s adaptation, asians and caucasians are all still human
You are grasping at evolution like a fundamentalist lying to themselves the bible is perfect, you believe and hold onto myth like a religious zealot
You are exactly what you hate, just an atheist equivalent

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: neoholographic

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

Why do you believe this is the case? What is your reason for believing this is the case (that "it developed naturally")? Is it because:

Stop and start has been well elucidated in biochemistry.

?

That doesn't seem to be a reason to me to believe what you said about these "signals". Quite the opposite, the research into these signals and how they function within the larger interdependent systems of machinery making up a whole living organism, rather strongly* points to at least 1 creator of the technology in question. *: or convincingly to me

So what is it about these signals that gives you a reason to believe that they "developed naturally"? Which is obviously the belief/faith that you are 'expounding' here. Without the detail that seems to be implied with the verb "expounding".