The intricate design inferred in biological science is why Nobel laureate and co-discoverer of DNA’s structure, Francis Crick, encouraged his fellow evolutionists that “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed but rather evolved.”
But we have seen that things have not evolved! Will science continue to blindly try to prove this impossible theory? If so, they are doomed to failure, as stated by Nobel laureate Dr. Robert A. Millikan: “The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution, which no scientist can ever prove” (Bowden, The Rise of the Evolution Fraud..., p. 216-218).
Cellular Machine Code
The cell is the most advanced engineering marvel ever discovered. Humanity has never created anything that functions nearly as efficiently as the cell. In fact, aspects of the cell are even used when designing complex and redundant systems.
Each part contains highly complex, three-dimensional structures. The formation of these proteins is the direct impetus behind their function. Certain amino acid configurations form each “mini-machine,” which regulates various parts of the cell.
The most complex of these proteins are found in the nucleus—the supercomputer—of the cell. Not only does the nucleus control how the mini-machines interoperate and when new machines need to be manufactured, it contains the complete blueprint for every machine in that cell.
But in the cells of each human being, the nucleus contains the blueprint for not only each specific cell, but for every cell in the body. Truly a super-blueprint!
This blueprint is contained in deoxyribonucleic acid—most often called DNA. Because of the way DNA is encoded, the amount of information it contains is phenomenal! And it has to be; even the most simple forms of life are highly complex. Take, for instance, E. coli bacteria. This “simple” bacterium has over one trillion bits of information stored in its DNA.
If you counted every letter in every book in the world’s largest library (10 million books), you would approach one trillion “bits of information.” Yes, it requires THAT much information for even a single bacterium to exist.
Imagine how much more information is needed to control and reproduce the approximately 100 trillion cells in your body. Yet all this information is stored in this microscopic structure called DNA.
How does so much fit in such a little space? The answer is found in the encoding of DNA. Its structure and encoding method are nearly as fascinating as the amount of information it contains.
No doubt, you have seen pictures of a double helix. It is this incredibly efficient structure that allows DNA to encode so much. Understanding this structure deepens the question of how such information came to be present.
As displayed in the illustration, DNA looks like a spiral ladder. A close-up of the individual rungs shows the amazing complexity of this microscopic marvel. On either side of the DNA ladder are the individual sugars and phosphates. They are linked together with a chemical bond and form both sides of the ladder.
The phosphates are then chemically bonded to the nucleotides (designated by A, T, G and C, and located in the center). These structures create either side of the ladder and are attached using hydrogen bonds.
But as the above informational graphic shows, there are no bonds directly linking individual nucleotides —or “rungs”—together.
Yet this is where the genetic information is encoded!
There is no natural explanation for how information could form on this chemically unconnected axis—but there is a reason for it. Chemical bonds are very common in nature. A salt crystal is one such example. Any crystalline structure is made up of a series of repeating chemically bonded elements. That is the key!
Chemical bonds create patterns. As can be seen on either side of the DNA ladder, the sugars and phosphates are repeated. If the nucleotides in the spine of the DNA molecule were connected via any sort of bond, they would be limited in the amount and complexity of the information it could contain.
Like crystals, the pattern encoded into DNA would repeat. Every time guanine (G) appeared, there would be adenine (A) following it. But the lack of any chemical bond means that any of the four bases can attach to any location on the spine. All are accepted and none is preferred!
Not only does chemical bonding explain why crystals and related substances form in the way that they do, it makes the information encoded in DNA all that more amazing. There is no natural way to explain how such highly detailed and complex information “appeared.”
Repeating patterns create mantras, not messages!
Finding the source of these messages is the “holy grail” of evolutionary science.
The bonding structure of DNA does not allow it to generate its own information. In such a case, the information transcends the medium. The only logical conclusion is that the source of the information is an intelligent force—a Creator—as the source of that information.
http://rcg.org/books/effai.html#p1
Originally posted by RJHindsit was going pretty well until the conclusion:
[b]Cellular Machine Code
The cell is the most advanced engineering marvel ever discovered. Humanity has never created anything that functions nearly as efficiently as the cell. In fact, aspects of the cell are even used when designing complex and redundant systems.
Each part contains highly complex, three-dimensional structures. The formation of ...[text shortened]... ligent force—a Creator—as the source of that information.
http://rcg.org/books/effai.html#p1[/b]
The only logical conclusion is that the source of the information is an intelligent force—a Creator—as the source of that information.
um, no.
but do go on. at least you're learning something, if a bit skewed from a perspective of absurdity.
eventually though, your going to have to read real scientific writings on the subject to be able to filter out all the BS included in the rcg.org crapsite.
Originally posted by RJHinds
Then you are being dishonest in using another way of defining the "same thing" to try to refute my answer. It is not my falult you are a liar. I am just telling it like it is. If you consider it an insult, I am glad because it show you may have some conscience about right and wrong.
Then you are being dishonest in using another way of defining the "same thing"
how can it be “ dishonest” when it IS the same thing by definition! ?
The self-replicating information code of the bacteria ( whether for its “own kind” or not -that part is, obviously, irrelevant ) IS simply all the genes and genetic material the cell contains.
What else could it be?
So exactly how is stating that known fact being “dishonest”?
to try to refute my answer.
it makes absolutely no difference which definition I use to “refute” your “answer”! And “refute” your “answer” to what?
I had previously said:
“the genome is simply all the genes and genetic material the cell contains ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genome )
So what barrier is there in the genome to prevent a bacteria evolving into a different kind? “
now if we use the earlier definition for the genome instead of the latter one used above, we get:
“the genome is is the information that tells the bacteria how to reproduce its own kind
So what barrier is there in the genome to prevent a bacteria evolving into a different kind? “
so how does this lessen the implicit point here to refute anything?
If the genome is is the information that tells the bacteria how to “reproduce its “own kind” then what is the barrier that prevents it having the potential via mutations and natural selection to not just only reproduce its “own kind” but evolve into a “different kind”? Exactly WHERE is the contradiction there supposed to be?
Anyway, we are getting off-topic here. Back to the topic in hand: you still haven't answered my main questions:
Explain to us exactly WHAT is this natural barrier that God set up to prevent mutations giving new genetic information to change bacteria to another kind and what does this barrier consist of and exactly WHERE is it? -I mean, is this barrier inside the cell? If so, exactly WHERE? If it is in the DNA then exactly WHERE in the DNA is it and how does that work?
also:
I have shown you the links that show evidence of chromosome duplication and point mutation and not even a half-wit will fail to see that you can have both together i.e. first a chromosome duplication and then one of the copies having point mutation. It is OBVIOUS that this COMBINATION of mutations must sometimes occur and that that combination means new information no matter HOW you look at it!
Do you deny this? What barrier is preventing this? Can you show us EVIDENCE of this barrier that prevents this combination of mutations that collectively will add new information?
Originally posted by humyApparently you can not understand me, so why don't you just show me scientific proof that one of the following kinds of bacteria has changed into one of the other kinds.Then you are being dishonest in using another way of defining the "same thing"
how can it be “ dishonest” when it IS the same thing by definition! ?
The self-replicating information code of the bacteria ( whether for its “own kind” or not -that part is, obviously, irrelevant ) IS simply all the genes and genetic material the cell contai ...[text shortened]... that prevents this combination of mutations that collectively will add new information? [/b]
Bacillus, Coccus, Mycoplasma, Rickettsia, and Spirillum.
Originally posted by RJHindsWhy should I answer you questions if you will not answer mine?
Apparently you can not understand me, so why don't you just show me scientific proof that one of the following kinds of bacteria has changed into one of the other kinds.
Bacillus, Coccus, Mycoplasma, Rickettsia, and Spirillum.
You are just obviously trying to distract us from the fact that you have no real answers for my questions.
I will answer all your questions if you will start answering some of mine.
So, rather than change the topic, Back to the topic in hand: you still haven't answered my main questions:
Explain to us exactly WHAT is this natural barrier that God set up to prevent mutations giving new genetic information to change bacteria to another kind and what does this barrier consist of and exactly WHERE is it? -I mean, is this barrier inside the cell? If so, exactly WHERE? If it is in the DNA then exactly WHERE in the DNA is it and how does that work?
also:
I have shown you the links that show evidence of chromosome duplication and point mutation and not even a half-wit will fail to see that you can have both together i.e. first a chromosome duplication and then one of the copies having point mutation. It is OBVIOUS that this COMBINATION of mutations must sometimes occur and that that combination means new information no matter HOW you look at it!
Do you deny this? What barrier is preventing this? Can you show us EVIDENCE of this barrier that prevents this combination of mutations that collectively will add new information?
Originally posted by humyI answered yours as best as I can. i can't help it if you do not understand my snswers. So why don't we just cut to the chase if you have any scientific proof that one kind of bacteria has changed into one of the other kinds.
I repeat, why should I answer you questions if you will not answer mine?
You are just obviously trying to distract us from the fact that you have no real answers for my questions.
Originally posted by RJHinds
I answered yours as best as I can. i can't help it if you do not understand my snswers. So why don't we just cut to the chase if you have any scientific proof that one kind of bacteria has changed into one of the other kinds.
I answered yours as best as I can.
What on earth are you talking about? you haven't given ANY answer to those questions I just listed. Is THAT your "best" answers!? ( i.e. none ) 😛
as I said, I will answer all your questions if you start to answer mine.
Originally posted by humyI am not sure of the exact answer, since I am not a scientist; but I think it has something to do with genetic information code and especially with that code that makes the bacteria reproduce after its own kind, which has been observed. There has been no observation of a bacteria reproducing another kind of bacteria to my knowledge. So that is why I was asking you to produce such evidence, if you have it, to proof my theory wrong. If you can do that then I do not have a leg to stand on and my agrument falls down.I answered yours as best as I can.
What on earth are you talking about? you haven't given ANY answer to those questions I just listed. Is THAT your "best" answers!? ( i.e. none ) 😛
as I said, I will answer all your questions if you start to answer mine.
Originally posted by RJHinds
I am not sure of the exact answer, since I am not a scientist; but I think it has something to do with genetic information code and especially with that code that makes the bacteria reproduce after its own kind, which has been observed. There has been no observation of a bacteria reproducing another kind of bacteria to my knowledge. So that is why I was as ...[text shortened]... eory wrong. If you can do that then I do not have a leg to stand on and my agrument falls down.
I am not sure of the exact answer, since I am not a scientist; but I think it has something to do with genetic information code and especially with that code that makes the bacteria reproduce after its own kind, which has been observed.
In other words, you have no idea.
And, because you have no idea, you have no rational premise whatsoever that such a barrier exists to stop a mutation adding new information.
Well, I suppose we can call that an “answer” of a sort albeit a very disappointing one. So now, to be fair, I will answer your question just as I promised:
so why don't you just show me scientific proof that one of the following kinds of bacteria has changed into one of the other kinds.
Bacillus, Coccus, Mycoplasma, Rickettsia, and Spirillum.
there is no proof of any specific species of one of those kinds changing to any specific species of one of those other kinds ( or at least none that I am aware of ) nor is there any need of such proof to prove evolution because evolution has already been proven by a vast mountain of OTHER evidence.
Originally posted by humyWell, it looks like all we have is our opinions and nothing has changed for I still don't see any evolution and you don't see any creation. I guess we will have to leave it at that for the time being.I am not sure of the exact answer, since I am not a scientist; but I think it has something to do with genetic information code and especially with that code that makes the bacteria reproduce after its own kind, which has been observed.
In other words, you have no idea.
And, because you have no idea, you have no rational premise whatsoever ...[text shortened]... prove evolution because evolution has already been proven by a vast mountain of OTHER evidence.
Originally posted by RJHinds
Well, it looks like all we have is our opinions and nothing has changed for I still don't see any evolution and you don't see any creation. I guess we will have to leave it at that for the time being.
Well, it looks like ALL we have is our opinions (my emphasis)
No -in my case, evidence and logic and I have shown both in my posts including some actual proofs.
Would you like a reminder?
Originally posted by humyWell, it looks like ALL we have is our opinions (my emphasis)
No -in my case, evidence and logic and I have shown both in my posts including some actual proofs.
Would you like a reminder?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=3yNju1_-CMk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_replication
Originally posted by RJHindsSo you apparently think DNA is what encodes life. Knowing that, do you think your god engenders every change in DNA through direct intervention?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqESR7E4b_8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=3yNju1_-CMk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_replication
Originally posted by sonhouseSimple Presentation of DNA Replication by an Evolutionist
So you apparently think DNA is what encodes life. Knowing that, do you think your god engenders every change in DNA through direct intervention?
DNA Replication Part 1
&feature=related
DNA Replication Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=CRTXxXHBM3U&feature=endscreen
And this all evolved. Yeah, right???