1. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    07 May '12 09:411 edit
    The language of Life Demonstrated
    YouTube&feature=relmfu

    Intelligence recognized by information in DNA
    YouTube&feature=relmfu

    P.S. The current state of Intelligent Design
    http://www.discovery.org/a/3914
  2. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    07 May '12 10:57
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    The language of Life Demonstrated
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOx8WCb5dQ&feature=relmfu

    Intelligence recognized by information in DNA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFoNTIw09Z0&feature=relmfu

    P.S. The current state of Intelligent Design
    http://www.discovery.org/a/3914
    This makes it reasonable to infer that the evidence of biology, if not the philosophy that dominates this science, suggests the need to consider that some intelligent cause may have played an indispensable role in the origin and development of life.

    No. That is not a reasonable inference.
  3. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    52618
    07 May '12 11:49
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    The language of Life Demonstrated
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOx8WCb5dQ&feature=relmfu

    Intelligence recognized by information in DNA
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFoNTIw09Z0&feature=relmfu

    P.S. The current state of Intelligent Design
    http://www.discovery.org/a/3914
    If there is intelligence operating in biology in my opinion it is in the intelligence of the DNA itself. I think DNA acts like a computer and has hidden meanings we have yet to discover. We find new facts about DNA all the time and I think it will lead to the discovery of intelligence built in to DNA.
  4. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    07 May '12 12:541 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    If there is intelligence operating in biology in my opinion it is in the intelligence of the DNA itself. I think DNA acts like a computer and has hidden meanings we have yet to discover. We find new facts about DNA all the time and I think it will lead to the discovery of intelligence built in to DNA.
    If there is intelligence operating in biology in my opinion it is in the intelligence of the DNA itself. I think DNA acts like a computer and has hidden meanings we have yet to discover. We find new facts about DNA all the time and I think it will lead to the discovery of intelligence built in to DNA.



    Your suggesting is exactly how A.E. Wilder-Smith defines the theory of Evolution.
    Wilder-Smith is a Phd. in organic chemistry and holds two other doctorates in pharmacology.


    In his book [b]"The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution" c.1981 he wrote:

    " Evolution is thus basically an attempt to explain the origin of life from matter and energy without the aid of know-how, concept, teleonomy, or exogenous (extra-material) information. It represents an attempt to explain the formation of the genetic code from the chemical components of DNA without the aid of a genetic concept (information) originating outside the molecules of the chromosomes. This is comparable to the assumption that the text of a book originates from the paper molecules on which the sentences appear, and not from an external source of information ..."
  5. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    07 May '12 13:02
    Originally posted by jaywill
    "This is comparable to the assumption that the text of a book originates from the paper molecules on which the sentences appear, and not from an external source of information ..."
    No, it isn't comparable. A much better analogy would be the formation of complex patterns in snowflakes, or some of the interesting patterns generated by turing machines or the game of life.
  6. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    07 May '12 13:08
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    No, it isn't comparable. A much better analogy would be the formation of complex patterns in snowflakes, or some of the interesting patterns generated by turing machines or the game of life.
    Langton's ant
  7. Joined
    19 Jul '08
    Moves
    77354
    07 May '12 13:391 edit
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    If there is intelligence operating in biology in my opinion it is in the intelligence of the DNA itself. I think DNA acts like a computer and has hidden meanings we have yet to discover. We find new facts about DNA all the time and I think it will lead to the discovery of intelligence built in to DNA.
    Hummm. So where did this intelligence come from that DNA has? How did it become intelligent or who taught it or better yet, who programed it??
    Can a computer program itself?
  8. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    07 May '12 13:504 edits
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    No, it isn't comparable. A much better analogy would be the formation of complex patterns in snowflakes, or some of the interesting patterns generated by turing machines or the game of life.
    I think a functioning DNA molecule does a whole lot more than a snowflake. Unless in the future science discovers that the snowflake is not only kind of pretty by has some great functionality, I think the Wilder-Smith's analogy is better.

    Please don't expect me to think of a group of falling symetrically balanced snowflake is like a living chomosome.

    Pretty snowflakes folks - YouTube
  9. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    07 May '12 14:111 edit
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    No, it isn't comparable. A much better analogy would be the formation of complex patterns in snowflakes, or some of the interesting patterns generated by turing machines or the game of life.
    Maybe you think in another 300 million years Evolution will cause a snowman to come alive ? I mean when these snowflake are naturally selected to perform something like what a DNA molecule does ?

    We just need more time working on snowflakes to see a similar result with emergence of the DNA and RNA molecules ?
  10. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    07 May '12 14:17
    Originally posted by galveston75
    Hummm. So where did this intelligence come from that DNA has? How did it become intelligent or who taught it or better yet, who programed it??
    Can a computer program itself?
    I have to say I disagree with sonhouse here in that DNA is certainly not intelligent in any meaningful sense.

    While it can be helpful sometimes to use the analogy of saying that DNA is like a computer program or a
    blueprint it is important to understand that this is just an analogy.


    Neither DNA nor Evolution has any intention or end goal or desires or thoughts.

    DNA is simply a self replicating molecule that is simply following the laws of physics.

    Mutations, errors in it's copying process, that reduce it's ability to reproduce itself in it's present environment cause the copies to be
    worse at reproducing and thus are more likely to get wiped out.

    Mutations, errors in it's copying process, that improve it's ability to reproduce itself in it's present environment cause the copies to be
    better are reproducing and thus are more likely to survive.

    DNA molecules that produced enzymes that build protective support structures around the DNA (cell walls) had a better chance of surviving
    than DNA molecules that don't do this.

    This is evolution, The inevitable consequence of errors in DNA copying itself in the natural world.
  11. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    07 May '12 14:191 edit
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    [b]This makes it reasonable to infer that the evidence of biology, if not the philosophy that dominates this science, suggests the need to consider that some intelligent cause may have played an indispensable role in the origin and development of life.

    No. That is not a reasonable inference.[/b]
    Some scientists and evolutionary philosophers have changed their minds on evolution due to the discovery of information in DNA. They could not ignore the facts like many others do. Considering the facts, should result in many more changing their minds, however, this is a more difficult area for those that are emotionally tied to promoting evolution as fact.

    P.S.
    http://www.conservapedia.com/Evolution
  12. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    07 May '12 14:19
    Originally posted by jaywill
    Maybe you think in another 300 million years Evolution will cause a snowman to come alive ? I mean when these snowflake are naturally selected to perform something like what a DNA molecule does ?

    We just need more time working on snowflakes to see a similar result with emergence of the DNA and RNA molecules ?
    No you are missing the point of his analogies.

    Complexity arising from simple rules.

    He wasn't saying that a snowflake was alive or was exactly like DNA.

    He was saying that it is an example of incredible complexity and order arising from the
    simple laws governing freezing water molecules.
  13. Joined
    31 May '06
    Moves
    1795
    07 May '12 14:24
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Some scientists and evolutionary philosophers have changed their minds on evolution due to the discovery of information in DNA. They could not ignore the facts like many others do. Considering the facts, should result in many more changing their minds, however, this is a more difficult area for those that are emotionally tied to promoting evolution as fact.
    A very very very tiny minority of biologists think that DNA is evidence of design.

    And they are wrong.


    The vast overwhelming majority of biologists (and scientists in general) do not look at DNA
    and see evidence for a designer or creation.

    I don't care how much you want to disagree with that position it is an undeniable fact that
    the overwhelming majority of biologists disagree with you.

    The science does not support your position. period.

    Claiming otherwise is a lie.

    You are too cowardly to admit that this is so but your position is purely faith based and is in
    direct conflict with all the known evidence and with the entirety of science and it's methods.
  14. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12695
    07 May '12 14:25
    Originally posted by googlefudge
    No you are missing the point of his analogies.

    Complexity arising from simple rules.

    He wasn't saying that a snowflake was alive or was exactly like DNA.

    He was saying that it is an example of incredible complexity and order arising from the
    simple laws governing freezing water molecules.
    Again the question how the laws came into being is ignored. Why should their be any laws at all, if everything happened by chance in the beginning?
  15. Joined
    02 Aug '06
    Moves
    12622
    07 May '12 14:371 edit
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    Again the question how the laws came into being is ignored. Why should their be any laws at all, if everything happened by chance in the beginning?
    Also ignored, I think, is that DNA scheme represents a language. As far as we know that is not the case with snowflake structure.

    I leave a little room for the possibility that in the future perhaps some astounding discovery will be made about the coordination of billions of snowflakes to do something beside pile up snow on the ground, will amaze a future generation.
Back to Top