Is It Reasonable?

A Sophisticated Language System in Action in a Subway in Bristol.

A Sophisticated Language System in Action in a Subway in Bristol.

DNA is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters- just as the information on this blog is not a product of the properties of the pixels on this screen.  What other coding system has existed without intelligent design?  Is it reasonable to propose the DNA coding system came about by random chance without being created?  Mmm…

Advertisements
8 comments
    • I once visited the site where the the remains of the Boeing 747 that was blown up over Lockerbie was stored. Every recoverable part had been meticulously collected. It was a huge pile of twisted metal and aircraft parts. You’re belief has the same probability of throwing a stick of dymamite in the pile and it forming a Boeing 747. Now you may say you have plenty of dynamite and millions of years but I’m still going say you are foolish for thinking it’s possible. However, knowing human nature I am sure that there is a statisitcian out there who could get together with a philosopher to show that it’s feasible much as they have done with the Big Bang Guess, But seriously, are you going to trust them? or is it maybe there are ulterior motives at play?

  1. Chris Woods said:

    This is a ridiculous question which has been deliberately phrased to misrepresent the science.
    It’s also not your question as you cut and pasted it from creation.com

    The question has already been debunked here, http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=17287&lofi=1
    However, I shall repeat some of the answers below…

    “The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters”
    is flat-out wrong. DNA creates a template whereby amino acids are assembled molecule-by-molecule. There is no “meaning” to it other than the specific chemical properties of the molecules on the strand.
    In addition to this, we have frequent interchangeability in the amino acid make up of a protein.

    Though thinking a DNA sequence as a “code” or “language” and ribosomes as a “decoder” or “interpreter” help enormously with understanding details of transcription and translation, these labels we put on them are purely constructs to do just that, help with our understanding.

    Ribosomes do not interpret DNA codons as human beings interpret written language. As babies, humans must learn what letters and symbols represent, and then extrapolate from them the meanings of words phrases and sentences. This is not the case for ribosomes. They are never taught. If you mix ribosomes with amino acids, ATP, and DNA they automatically work because of biochemistry (or just chemistry).

    DNA is as much a code or language as a roller coaster is. How does DNA “know” it will be translated into such and such protein? How does a roller coaster “know” to achieve certain speeds and accelerations at such and such times? They don’t “know”, they just follow physics/chemistry and whatever happens happens.

    Now, one could say something along the lines of…”But DNA produces something functional and useful”. Yes, it does, but that’s a result of natural selection. DNA sequences that don’t produce something useful would have very little chance on getting passed down to the next generation.

    How could the DNA coding system arise without a designer?

    Probably from a simpler code. I don’t know. The first code would have acted as both enzymes and information container, like RNA. There are abiogenesis theories about RNA-worlds. But it’s certainly not impossible. I’m not any expert in this, but I can offer a video to illustrate.

    Whenever I have read or watched about this, nothing ever suggested a supernatural explanation needed. It just takes study and science to get a picture of what it could’ve been like.

    And as has been raised before it’s not an arbitrary language, it’s chemistry. The question proves its source biased and uninformed again.

    • Chris Woods said:

      A film by Ray Comfort that’s endorsed by Ken Ham.
      I can’t wait!

  2. Oh and by the way your presuppositions are so ingrained you missed the principle being taught that coding systems are designed. Oh and the by the way, thanks for giving credit to the wonderful resource that is available at http://www.creation.com. Is all the information you kindly share original thought or do you use you senses and reason to consider. through the filter of your worldview, other material which you then share? Rhetorical question no need to answer. You see Chris you do know God, it is absurd to imagine you can know anything apart from him when he put in place the constants of logic, science and morality which you so readily borrow from. God commands you to repent. His first command to you is to have no other god’s before him. You have made a god out of JK Rowling’s Dumbledore, many have made up false gods to bow down and worship or maybe it’s just your own superb intellect from which you see as the god. It matters not, what matters is you will be in big trouble on the day of judgement. So repent, confess and turn from your sinful ways Chris and put your trust and faith in Jesus Christ.

  3. Chris Woods said:

    You said…
    “you missed the principle being taught that coding systems are designed.” – No. You missed the line above that reads…
    “Though thinking a DNA sequence as a “code” or “language” and ribosomes as a “decoder” or “interpreter” help enormously with understanding details of transcription and translation, these labels we put on them are purely constructs to do just that, help with our understanding. ”

    You said…
    “You see Chris you do know God, it is absurd to imagine you can know anything apart from him when he put in place the constants of logic, science and morality which you so readily borrow from.” – Quintessential circular nonsense.

    You said…
    “You have made a god out of JK Rowling’s Dumbledore” – Wrong. I have not made him a god. Dumbledore existed before I was born and he will exist after I am gone. Dumbledore is eternal.
    Don’t diss the Dumbledore or he’ll have you when your dead!

  4. Chris Woods said:

    Oh and by the way…
    I am more than happy to mention http://www.creation.com
    It’s all about naming your sources.
    If you print something that isn’t your own work, you should credit the author. This allows the reader to investigate the quote further. It’s also more honest and polite.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: