DNA Code Indicates Creator

[bhsmte]

Intelligent design qualifies as a scientific theory





Hypothesis (Prediction): Natural structures will be found that contain many parts arranged in intricate patterns, metabolic pathways similar to electronic circuits, sophisticated language and translation systems, indicating high levels of Information, and interdependence, like hard/software. No information, nor codes or ciphers ( translators ) can exist and will be found without an initial mental source, since information is, by its nature, a mental and not a material quantity.

Observation: The genetic code system is a language , and the universal code is nearly optimal and maximally efficient ( only 1 in every million random alternative codes generated is more efficient than the genetic code ). Genomes use the genetic code to write two separate languages, beside a cipher, to translate codon triplets into a amino-acid "alphabet" constituent of 20 different left handed amino acids to make proteins. One code describes how proteins are made, and the other instructs the cell on how genes are controlled and when expressed. There are 13 characteristics of human language. DNA shares 10 of them ( all LEVELS of Information: Statistics, Syntax, Semantics, Pragmatics, Aprobatics are used ) This comparison between cell language and human language is not a loose analogy - it’s literal. Human language and cell language both employ multilayered symbols to produce a blueprint - required to describe a artifact, and in biology, a organism.

DNA sequences that code for proteins need to convey, in addition to the protein-coding information, several different signals at the same time. These “parallel codes” include binding sequences for regulatory and structural proteins, signals for splicing, and RNA secondary structure. The universal genetic code can efficiently carry arbitrary parallel codes much better than the vast majority of other possible genetic codes. This property is related to the identity of the stop codons. We find that the ability to support parallel codes is strongly tied to another useful property of the genetic code—minimization of the effects of frame-shift translation errors. Whereas many of the known regulatory codes reside in nontranslated regions of the genome, the present findings suggest that protein-coding regions can readily carry abundant additional information. The output are thousands of essential proteins and enzymes required for life; sophisticated molecular machinery is needed to replicate the code (for inheritance/perpetuation), transcribe it, translate it into protein with many intermediate steps requiring highly specific operations, and to repair it in the foreseen event that it is damaged (to preserve/protect it) or destroy it in the event that it suffers irreparable damage (to forestall cancer). Beside the standard genetic code, other 23 genetic codes are known, beside epigenetic codes, that is, the Splicing Code, the Metabolic Code, the Signal Transduction Codes, the Signal Integration Codes , the Histone Code, the Tubulin Code, the Sugar Code, and the Glycomic Code, all essential to define a organism and phenotype.

Experiment :
One language is written on top of the other, which is why the second language remained hidden for so long. Biologic systems and processes cannot be fully accounted for in terms of the principles and laws of physics and chemistry alone, but they require in addition the principles of semiotics—the science of symbols and signs, including linguistics. Summarizing the state of the art in the study of the code evolution, science cannot escape considerable skepticism. It seems that the two-pronged fundamental questions: “why is the genetic code the way it is and how did it come to be?”, that was asked over 50 years ago, at the dawn of molecular biology, might remain pertinent even in another 50 years, if methodological naturalism is adopted, and only natural explanations for its orgin are permitted. The consolation is that scientists cannot think of a more fundamental problem in biology. Despite extensive and, in many cases, elaborate attempts to model code optimization, ingenious theorizing along the lines of the coevolution theory, and considerable experimentation, very little definitive progress has been made.

Intelligent agents act frequently with an end goal in mind, constructing complex multipart-machines, that require a blueprint to build the object. Furthermore, Computers integrate software/hardware and store high levels of instructional complex coded information. In our experience, systems that either a) require or b) store large amounts of specified / instructed complex information such as codes and languages, and which are constructed in a interdependence of hard and software invariably originate from an intelligent source. No exception. There is a presence of an identical feature in both DNA and intelligently designed codes, languages, and artifacts. Because we know intelligent agents can (and do) produce complex and functionally specified sequences of symbols and arrangements of matter, intelligent agency qualifies as an adequate causal explanation for the origin of this effect. Since, in addition, materialistic theories have proven universally inadequate for explaining the origin of coded information and translation systems, intelligent causation stands as the only entity with the causal power known to produce this feature of living systems.

Falsification: Nobody has yet been able to demonstrate naturally emerging informational systems based on codes and ciphers, and instructional information stored within these codes to produce a defined complex specified outcome. Perry Marshall, author of the book Evolution 2.0, has yet to pay the prize to someone that will come up and will meet the challenge.

LOL

 

[Godexists]

LOL

your point ?

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Hypothesis (Prediction): Natural structures will be found that contain many parts arranged in intricate patterns, metabolic pathways similar to electronic circuits, sophisticated language and translation systems, indicating high levels of Information, and interdependence, like hard/software. No information, nor codes or ciphers ( translators ) can exist and will be found without an initial mental source, since information is, by its nature, a mental and not a material quantity.

So, the prediction is that we 'll find natural structures containing language and information but at the same time natural structures cannot create language or information. Contradicting yourself in your opening 2 sentences is quite an achievement!

semiotics—the science of symbols and signs, including linguistics.

Linguistics is not part of semiotics. They are related disciplines.

In our experience, systems that either a) require or b) store large amounts of specified / instructed complex information such as codes and languages, and which are constructed in a interdependence of hard and software invariably originate from an intelligent source. No exception.

DNA would be an exception. Except if you have some sort of confirmation bias which implies that there can be no exceptions.

...intelligent causation stands as the only entity with the causal power known to produce this feature of living systems.

Really? It's been shown that intelligence in living systems is due to an intelligent agent? That's Nobel Award stuff. Citation definitely needed.

Falsification:

Nobody has yet been able to demonstrate naturally emerging informational systems based on codes and ciphers, and instructional information stored within these codes to produce a defined complex specified outcome. Perry Marshall, author of the book Evolution 2.0, has yet to pay the prize to someone that will come up and will meet the challenge.

Reword to "Perry Marshall rejects naturalistic explanations for evolution of DNA. And since nobody can prove a negative (no intelligence involved) he will never pay out."

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So what is your source for the design you admit??

Natural forces, obviously.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Intelligent design qualifies as a scientific theory

Hypothesis (Prediction): Natural structures will be found that contain many parts arranged in intricate patterns, metabolic pathways similar to electronic circuits, sophisticated language and translation systems, indicating high levels of Information, and interdependence, like hard/software. No information, nor codes or ciphers ( translators ) can exist and will be found without an initial mental source, since information is, by its nature, a mental and not a material quantity.

Here's your problem, an incomplete understanding of information. You're using a selective anthropocentric viewpoint. The term information is used informally in a variety of ways, but it has a strict scientific definition that those usages are subsets of, approximations to, or corruptions of.

Information is not a mental quantity, it is a property of the universe, of real systems; it is the number of possible alternatives for something (a 'bit' is the minimum amount of information - two alternatives, e.g. 0 or 1). The information content of a system is the number of different ways that system (e.g. its atoms) can be arranged (so is related to the inverse of entropy).

Information about a system is transferred by direct or indirect interaction between two systems; the result is that both systems change, and the resulting correlation between the two systems is the information exchanged - and when one of those systems is you, you have some information about the other system.

So when a stream runs down a rocky valley, the water interacts with the rocks in the stream bed, resulting in turbulent motion that is correlated with the particular arrangement of the rocks, and so it carries information about the stream bed (e.g. the amount of turbulence might correspond to the roughness of the stream bed, so supplying that information).

So the world consists of a continuous set of interactions between systems, producing correlations that are a continual exchange of information.

The 'mental' aspect of information is the way we arbitrarily divide the information exchange in the world into that which is of interest or value to us and that which is not. It is the way we structure our relations to the world and give it meaning.

But from an information point of view, a living organism is a set of chemical processes continually interacting with the world, exchanging information. Only the most efficient at managing these correlations (at integrating this information), will persist, so we should expect to see natural selection producing highly efficient information management systems. The use of indirect mappings, abstractions, and representations makes information systems more effective and efficient, so it is no surprise that we see that such systems have evolved in living things, including DNA and its related cellular systems, and nervous systems, and brains capable of abstract thought, that have a misleading tendency to attribute agency (purpose & meaning) to the interaction of systems...

To cut a long story short, your hypothesis is based on faulty premises, so your construction is built on sand.

 

[Godexists]

Wanna Build a Cell? A DVD Player Might Be Easier 1

Perry marshall , evolution 2.0 :
Wanna Build a Cell? A DVD Player Might Be Easier Imagine that you’re building the world’s first DVD player. What must you have before you can turn it on and watch a movie for the first time?

A DVD. How do you get a DVD? You need a DVD recorder first. How do you make a DVD recorder? First you have to define the language. When Russell Kirsch (who we met in chapter Cool created the world’s first digital image, he had to define a language for images first. Likewise you have to define the language that gets written on the DVD, then build hardware that speaks that language. Language must be defined first. Our DVD recorder/player problem is an encoding-decoding problem, just like the information in DNA. You’ll recall that communication, by definition, requires four things to exist:

1. A code
2. An encoder that obeys the rules of a code
3. A message that obeys the rules of the code
4. A decoder that obeys the rules of the code

These four things—language, transmitter of language, message, and receiver of language—all have to be precisely defined in advance before any form of communication can be possible at all.

 

[HitchSlap]

Wanna Build a Cell? A DVD Player Might Be Easier 1

Perry marshall , evolution 2.0 :
Wanna Build a Cell? A DVD Player Might Be Easier Imagine that you’re building the world’s first DVD player. What must you have before you can turn it on and watch a movie for the first time?

A DVD. How do you get a DVD? You need a DVD recorder first. How do you make a DVD recorder? First you have to define the language. When Russell Kirsch (who we met in chapter Cool created the world’s first digital image, he had to define a language for images first. Likewise you have to define the language that gets written on the DVD, then build hardware that speaks that language. Language must be defined first. Our DVD recorder/player problem is an encoding-decoding problem, just like the information in DNA. You’ll recall that communication, by definition, requires four things to exist:

1. A code
2. An encoder that obeys the rules of a code
3. A message that obeys the rules of the code
4. A decoder that obeys the rules of the code

These four things—language, transmitter of language, message, and receiver of language—all have to be precisely defined in advance before any form of communication can be possible at all.

FFS...

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

...You’ll recall that communication, by definition, requires four things to exist:

1. A code
2. An encoder that obeys the rules of a code
3. A message that obeys the rules of the code
4. A decoder that obeys the rules of the code

These four things—language, transmitter of language, message, and receiver of language—all have to be precisely defined in advance before any form of communication can be possible at all.

So do you think human languages were precisely defined in advance before anyone was able to communicate at all?

Hint: consider how people could have precisely defined a common language without being able to communicate at all...

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Wanna Build a Cell? A DVD Player Might Be Easier 1

Perry marshall , evolution 2.0 :
Wanna Build a Cell? A DVD Player Might Be Easier Imagine that you’re building the world’s first DVD player. What must you have before you can turn it on and watch a movie for the first time?

A DVD. How do you get a DVD? You need a DVD recorder first. How do you make a DVD recorder? First you have to define the language. When Russell Kirsch (who we met in chapter Cool created the world’s first digital image, he had to define a language for images first. Likewise you have to define the language that gets written on the DVD, then build hardware that speaks that language. Language must be defined first. Our DVD recorder/player problem is an encoding-decoding problem, just like the information in DNA. You’ll recall that communication, by definition, requires four things to exist:

1. A code
2. An encoder that obeys the rules of a code
3. A message that obeys the rules of the code
4. A decoder that obeys the rules of the code

These four things—language, transmitter of language, message, and receiver of language—all have to be precisely defined in advance before any form of communication can be possible at all.

False analogy.

DNA is not engaged in "communication".

And as Frumious pointed out... it's not like at some point in history some folks had a meeting one night and then "designed" English.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

False analogy.

DNA is not engaged in "communication".

And as Frumious pointed out... it's not like at some point in history some folks had a meeting one night and then "designed" English.

Apparently Perry Marshall is an online marketing strategist, and it shows...

 

[Loudmouth]

The "I can't see nuffin!" response again!

BTW
I didn't mention God-you did.

Yet another post devoid of evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

The "Ï cain't see nuffin cuz day is nuffin to see!" excuse again!

Yet another post devoid of evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

Well, when we test to see if DNA meets the qualifications which indicate planning mind we find that it does. .

What is that test? What are the controls, and what is the null hypothesis?

 

[Loudmouth]

Hypothesis (Prediction): Natural structures will be found that contain many parts arranged in intricate patterns, metabolic pathways similar to electronic circuits, sophisticated language and translation systems, indicating high levels of Information, and interdependence, like hard/software. No information, nor codes or ciphers ( translators ) can exist and will be found without an initial mental source, since information is, by its nature, a mental and not a material quantity.

The natural process of evolution already produces information, which falsifies your hypothesis.

Nucleic Acids Res. 2000 Jul 15;28(14):2794-9.

Evolution of biological information.

Schneider TD(1).

How do genetic systems gain information by evolutionary processes? Answering this
question precisely requires a robust, quantitative measure of information.
Fortunately, 50 years ago Claude Shannon defined information as a decrease in the
uncertainty of a receiver. For molecular systems, uncertainty is closely related
to entropy and hence has clear connections to the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
These aspects of information theory have allowed the development of a
straightforward and practical method of measuring information in genetic control
systems. Here this method is used to observe information gain in the binding
sites for an artificial 'protein' in a computer simulation of evolution. The
simulation begins with zero information and, as in naturally occurring genetic
systems, the information measured in the fully evolved binding sites is close to
that needed to locate the sites in the genome. The transition is rapid,
demonstrating that information gain can occur by punctuated equilibrium.​

 

[Radrook]

The natural process of evolution already produces information, which falsifies your hypothesis.

Nucleic Acids Res. 2000 Jul 15;28(14):2794-9.

Evolution of biological information.

Schneider TD(1).

How do genetic systems gain information by evolutionary processes? Answering this
question precisely requires a robust, quantitative measure of information.
Fortunately, 50 years ago Claude Shannon defined information as a decrease in the
uncertainty of a receiver. For molecular systems, uncertainty is closely related
to entropy and hence has clear connections to the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
These aspects of information theory have allowed the development of a
straightforward and practical method of measuring information in genetic control
systems. Here this method is used to observe information gain in the binding
sites for an artificial 'protein' in a computer simulation of evolution. The
simulation begins with zero information and, as in naturally occurring genetic
systems, the information measured in the fully evolved binding sites is close to
that needed to locate the sites in the genome. The transition is rapid,
demonstrating that information gain can occur by punctuated equilibrium.​

Nature itself is evidence of an intelligent designer. Otherwise it would not display mind. Your claim that blind chance leads to the construction of a brain is preposterous. In fact, that's more ridiculous than abiogenesis itself.

 

[Speedwell]

Nature itself is evidence of an intelligent designer. Otherwise it would not display mind. Your claim that blind chance leads to the construction of a brain is preposterous. In fact, that's more ridiculous than abiogenesis itself.

You need to define "blind chance" a little better--to make sure that the evolutionary process fits that description

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... Your claim that blind chance leads to the construction of a brain is preposterous...

It's not 'blind chance' alone, it's random variation with selection.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

... In our experience, systems that either a) require or b) store large amounts of specified / instructed complex information such as codes and languages, and which are constructed in a interdependence of hard and software invariably originate from an intelligent source. No exception.

This needs some refinement, because it leads to the typing fallacy I described earlier (#489).

We were aware of no exceptions until we discovered what DNA does.

For all we know there may be other, as yet undiscovered, exceptions.

 

[Mike Lane]

This video provides reasons why DNA is definite evidence that there is indeed a creator.

Is that video evidence for all creator Gods or just the Christian creator God?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Nature itself is evidence of an intelligent designer.

Why?

Otherwise it would not display mind

How did you establish that?

Your claim that blind chance leads to the construction of a brain is preposterous.

He didn't make that claim.

In fact, that's more ridiculous than abiogenesis itself.

I bet that if you were asked to explain abiogenesis, you couldn't - even if your life dependend on it.