Can anyone explain how the moth got it's owl eyes?

[Thurston-howell-III]

Those are molecules, not letters. Adenine (A), thymine (T), guanine (G), and cytosine (C).



Except there's no intentionality in DNA, and thus no teleology. So DNA is fundamentally different from human created codes.

There is!
“Information, transcription, translation, code, redundancy, synonymous, messenger, editing, and proofreading are all appropriate terms in biology. They take their meaning from information theory ( Shannon, 1948) and are not synonyms, metaphors, or analogies.”
(From Hubert Yockey , Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Yockey’s work is far from being anti-evolutionary material about information theory; Yockey is in fact an evolutionist.

 

[Thurston-howell-III]

You're operating on the level of a
4th grade kid laughing at the absurdity of
those big professors calling those squiggles
math!!

Even a kid knows math uses numbers!

Hey Einstein, how bout try answering the question instead of going off on a useless tangent.
What are the chances that nucleotides in dna are arranged in such a way, that they form a code?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Hey Einstein, how bout try answering the question instead of going off on a useless tangent.
What are the chances that nucleotides in dna are arranged in such a way, that they form a code?

The problem with asking for the probability is that the even has happened. It's 1:1.

 

[BCP1928]

There is!
“Information, transcription, translation, code, redundancy, synonymous, messenger, editing, and proofreading are all appropriate terms in biology. They take their meaning from information theory ( Shannon, 1948) and are not synonyms, metaphors, or analogies.”
(From Hubert Yockey , Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005).
Yockey’s work is far from being anti-evolutionary material about information theory; Yockey is in fact an evolutionist.

Correct, and since we have actually read Yockey's work (and Shannon's for that matter) some of us have reached the tentative conclusion that you are using "code" in an equivocal way to suit your rhetorical purposes. Since you have been very cagey about what those purposes are, we will stand by that conclusion for the time being.

 

[BCP1928]

How did the nucleotides get arranged to begin with?

I have no idea. I know basically nothing about abiogenesis except that it evidently happened. The "probability" is basically unknowable, because it would depend so much on physical conditions and the availability of starting materials.

 

[Thurston-howell-III]

The problem with asking for the probability is that the even has happened. It's 1:1.

You have no idea how it happened so you cannot say what the probabilities are, especially if the event has already occurred. That's pretty basic and you failed to pick up on it.
If your opponent were to get 10 royal flushes in a row, would you call that chance luck? How about 50 in a row?
"The probability of the chance formation of a hypothetical functional ‘simple’ cell, given all the ingredients, is acknowledged to be worse than 1 in 10^ 57800".....The Universe only has 10^160 electrons.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You have no idea how it happened so you cannot say what the probabilities are, especially if the event has already occurred. That's pretty basic and you failed to pick up on it.
If your opponent were to get 10 royal flushes in a row, would you call that chance luck? How about 50 in a row?
"The probability of the chance formation of a hypothetical functional ‘simple’ cell, given all the ingredients, is acknowledged to be worse than 1 in 10^ 57800".....The Universe only has 10^160 electrons.

But it's not even a question the theory of evolution has to concern itself with, because it's not something it talks about. All evolution talks about is how we got the various life forms we have, not how they started or how what number of proteins there were or how the nucleotides arranged themselves. That's got nothing to do with evolution, as you've already been told several times.

 

[Thurston-howell-III]

Correct, and since we have actually read Yockey's work (and Shannon's for that matter) some of us have reached the tentative conclusion that you are using "code" in an equivocal way to suit your rhetorical purposes. Since you have been very cagey about what those purposes are, we will stand by that conclusion for the time being.

From Perry Marshall:
Coded information” defined as a system of symbols used by an encoding and decoding mechanism, which transmits a message that is independent of the communication medium.

Examples of code include English, Chinese, computer languages, music, mating calls and radio signals. Codes always involve a system of symbols that represent ideas or plans. Other examples include, yes, Bee waggle dances. Bird songs. Whale songs. And ant communication by pheromone.

Since all the above are derivatives of DNA, my challenge to naturalists is to cite a single example of coded information that occurs naturally – outside the realm of life, outside the realm of DNA. All you need is one example.

 

[BCP1928]

You have no idea how it happened so you cannot say what the probabilities are, especially if the event has already occurred. That's pretty basic and you failed to pick up on it.

I don't see anything there that Warden "failed to pick up on."

If your opponent were to get 10 royal flushes in a row, would you call that chance luck? How about 50 in a row?
"The probability of the chance formation of a hypothetical functional ‘simple’ cell, given all the ingredients, is acknowledged to be worse than 1 in 10^ 57800".....The Universe only has 10^160 electrons.

Now you are equivocating on "chance formation."

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

From Perry Marshall:
Coded information” defined as a system of symbols used by an encoding and decoding mechanism, which transmits a message that is independent of the communication medium.

Examples of code include English, Chinese, computer languages, music, mating calls and radio signals. Codes always involve a system of symbols that represent ideas or plans. Other examples include, yes, Bee waggle dances. Bird songs. Whale songs. And ant communication by pheromone.

Since all the above are derivatives of DNA, my challenge to naturalists is to cite a single example of coded information that occurs naturally – outside the realm of life, outside the realm of DNA. All you need is one example.

Show us that DNA was a created code, not a naturally occurring one. Don't tell us that it is one because 'other codes are created'. Actually show us.

 

[BCP1928]

From Perry Marshall:
Coded information” defined as a system of symbols used by an encoding and decoding mechanism, which transmits a message that is independent of the communication medium.

Examples of code include English, Chinese, computer languages, music, mating calls and radio signals. Codes always involve a system of symbols that represent ideas or plans. Other examples include, yes, Bee waggle dances. Bird songs. Whale songs. And ant communication by pheromone.

Since all the above are derivatives of DNA, my challenge to naturalists is to cite a single example of coded information that occurs naturally – outside the realm of life, outside the realm of DNA. All you need is one example.

Yes, that clarifies the equivocation, but it actually weakens your argument.

 

[Thurston-howell-III]

You have no idea how it happened so you cannot say what the probabilities are, especially if the event has already occurred. That's pretty basic and you failed to pick up on it.
If your opponent were to get 10 royal flushes in a row, would you call that chance luck? How about 50 in a row?
"The probability of the chance formation of a hypothetical functional ‘simple’ cell, given all the ingredients, is acknowledged to be worse than 1 in 10^ 57800".....The Universe only has 10^160 electrons.

Yes, that clarifies the equivocation, but it actually weakens your argument.

how?

 

[Thurston-howell-III]

Show us that DNA was a created code, not a naturally occurring one. Don't tell us that it is one because 'other codes are created'. Actually show us.

I will and you know it, all codes come from intel, PERIOD. Show us otherwise.

 

[CoreyD]

That's quite a nonsensical statement and shows that you don't get how evolution works. We don't know the exact number of mutations for anything because that's not something that science is able to answer. But to say 'as many as needed' is accurate. Trial and error is the name of the game when it comes to evolution, and it would take many, many, many tries, especially for creatures as short lived as moths.

If I may...

"Nonsensical statement". "Don't get how evolution works"
Those are some pretty harsh personal attacks, don't you think.
Are you sure you really want to be saying these things to a person asking questions?

Do you know how evolution works?
Here is how it does not work.

Misconceptions about natural selection​

Because natural selection can produce amazing adaptations, it’s tempting to think of it as an all-powerful force, urging organisms on, constantly pushing them in the direction of progress — but this is not what natural selection is like at all.

First, natural selection is not all-powerful; it does not produce perfection. It’s all about getting genes into the next generation, and if your genes are “good enough” to do that, you don’t have to be perfect. This should be clear just by looking around us: human populations carry genes that cause disease, plants may not have the genes to survive a drought, a predator may not be quite fast enough to catch her prey every time she is hungry. No population or organism is perfectly adapted.

Second, it’s more accurate to think of natural selection as a process rather than as a guiding hand. Natural selection is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity — it is mindless and mechanistic. It has no goals; it’s not striving to produce “progress” or a balanced ecosystem.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I will and you know it, all codes come from intel, PERIOD. Show us otherwise.

No, you're making the claim that DNA is a created code. So show us that evidence then. Just saying it's created isn't showing us it was created.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

If I may...

I won't stop you.

"Nonsensical statement". "Don't get how evolution works"
Those are some pretty harsh personal attacks, don't you think.
Are you sure you really want to be saying these things to a person asking questions?

If you've responded with the guy, you'd see that my 'harsh personal attacks' are not such things but merely descriptors of statements he has made.

Do you know how evolution works?

I have a good idea of how it works, and I do not need someone to just randomly roll up and go "Actually, it's all this" and repeat stuff that anyone who knows about evolution already knows.

Now find some comment I have already made and try and link it to any of those quotes you drew from the website to try and justify acting why you're talking down to me.

 

[Thurston-howell-III]

But it's not even a question the theory of evolution has to concern itself with, because it's not something it talks about. All evolution talks about is how we got the various life forms we have, not how they started or how what number of proteins there were or how the nucleotides arranged themselves. That's got nothing to do with evolution, as you've already been told several times.

"Evolution" depends on DNA so why do you shy away from discussing the evolution of DNA? The start of life is which evolution is founded and is required by evolution as the starting point.

 

[BCP1928]

how?

By highlighting the way you are using "code" with two different definitions (Yockley's and Perry's) as the basis of your argument. The giveaway is that neither Yockley nor Perry are creationists.

 

[CoreyD]

I fail to see how I'm giving you mixed message on this whole thing. If you want to learn more about evolution, make the time and effort to read the sources available for free online.

I find Understanding Evolution – Your one-stop source for information on evolution to be a good source.
This is a good quote. Would you agree with it?

... “need,” “try,” and “want” are not very accurate words when it comes to explaining evolution. The population or individual does not “want” or “try” to evolve, and natural selection cannot try to supply what an organism “needs.” Natural selection just selects among whatever variations exist in the population. The result is evolution.

 

[BCP1928]

"Evolution" depends on DNA so why do you shy away from discussing the evolution of DNA? The start of life is which evolution is founded and is required by evolution as the starting point.

So it is, but it need not have come about by the same process as evolution then proceeds by.