Evolution is a product of encoded information not anything natural

a reply to: datguy

Your own quote refutes what you're saying.

Changes to a gene's DNA sequence, called mutations, can change the amino acid sequence of the protein it codes for

Changes to the DNA sequence:



There isn't any changes or mutations to the genetic code that codes for proteins in a sequence.



Again, it's pathetic! Even a guy I don't agree with much told you that you're wrong. He said:

i hold a degree in biotechnology and can tell you with no confusion that the term "genetic code" refers specifically to the translation of three-letter nucleotide combinations into specific amino acids (as designated by the chart neo keeps posting).

Yet you still babble on about bridges and bricks because you can't say you're wrong on a message board? Of course you know the difference just like everybody reading this thread knows the difference, but for some reason, you think if you repeat the lies someone will believe you.

originally posted by: neoholographic

Yet you still babble on about bridges and bricks because you can't say you're wrong on a message board? Of course you know the difference just like everybody reading this thread knows the difference, but for some reason, you think if you repeat the lies someone will believe you.

The funniest part is that no one is reading the thread, even the ones who have commented on my comments failed to see the part where I admitted I was wrong, even I after I linked that comment.

and after I admitted my fault you called me a troll and ignored the fact, and as many times as I tried to keep the conversation going you got stuck on pedantic semantics rather than intellectual content.

well played

a reply to: charlyv

You said:

When I read things like "evolution is not natural.." I cannot help to think that everything is natural, and evolution itself would have to be as natural as anything else in nature and nothing could exist that would be ancillary to it.

Also:

Intelligence evolves via evolution and is as natural as everything else. Parity and checksums which are some of the error correcting that people use were designed out of necessity to build our computers, just as the error checking required of DNA and RNA were designed out of necessity to help life itself evolve.

Evolution isn't natural. There's nothing in nature like DNA. Nature responds to it's environment. It doesn't need encoded information telling it how to be arranged.

If you put a piece of ice on the table, it melts. The right conditions, you get a thunderstorm. If dirt gets wet it becomes mud. These things don't need encoded information. You don't need encoded information and error detection and correction to tell dirt how to become mud when it gets wet.

I have asked biologist and geneticist for years what's the origin of encoded information and there's no answer. This is because information is separate from the storage medium. DNA is a storage medium and we can encode it with information.

Harvard stores 70 billion books using DNA

Research team stores 5.5 petabits, or 1 million gigabits, per cubic millimeter in DNA storage medium
www.computerworld.com...

An intelligent mind chooses a storage medium, puts that medium into a sequence and stores information on that sequence. That sequence is then transmitted and you need error detection and correction because nature destroys encoded information. You make an encoding/decoding system to go against the errors caused by nature.

A DVD is encoded with information and the DVD player is designed to decode that information. Computer language is encoded with information and the computer is designed to decode that information. Anytime you see encoding/decoding systems it's caused by intelligence. There's no evidence that non-intelligence can cause encoding/decoding of information. Here's more:

DNA transcription is an encoding / decoding mechanism isomorphic with Claude Shannon’s 1948 model: The sequence of base pairs is encoded into messenger RNA which is decoded into proteins.

Also:

“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.” (Hubert P. Yockey, Information Theory, Evolution, and the Origin of Life, Cambridge University Press, 2005)
evo2.org...

The Principle of sufficient reason says I have to reject the negation that says non-intelligence can cause encoding/decoding system to occur. There's no sufficient reason to believe such a thing can happen. I can see intelligence causing encoding/decoding systems to occur all the time. This is how we build modern civilization.

Again, the encoding of information isn't natural. This is because information isn't in the storage medium but it comes from the mind of the encoder. Here's an example:

I can say if there's 2 chairs around the table, then call me on my work phone at 5 PM but if there's 4 chairs around the table, call me on my cell phone at 6PM.

I have encoded information on the sequence of chairs around a table. The chairs and the table are a storage medium just like DNA. The table and the chairs contain NO INFORMATION. The storage medium doesn't know anything about cell phones, work phones, 5PM or 6Pm. That information comes from the mind of the encoder and that information can be decoded by another intelligent mind that knows the code or machinery designed to decode that information. This is arbitrary not natural.

So there has to be an encoder!

A storage medium doesn't encode itself with information. This is why information is copied from the gene to the polypeptide chain and you have to protect this encoded information with error detection and correction from errors.

This is clear evidence that supports intelligent design and rejects any notion of a natural interpretation of evolution.

The above was an appeal to incredulity. There is not a single piece of evidence to support those claims. There is plenty of evidence to refute those claims.

Neo and his cult members would have you believe that nothing so complex could come into exist on its own. Either through deliberate deception or from wilful ignorance Neo is not telling you that this genetic codon took billions of years to evolve into what we know today - into the charts that Neo repeated shows you.

This cult is dishonest. It has a history of faking claims and evidence to fit the narrative of its bible. Nothing not mentioned in its books can be allowed to exist for fear of discrediting its writings and therefore its rigid faith.

They are a cult.

a reply to: TerraLiga

Notice how Terra thinks if he mentions cult in his post people will not see his post is devoid of any substance. He said:

The above was an appeal to incredulity. There is not a single piece of evidence to support those claims. There is plenty of evidence to refute those claims.

He said there's plenty of evidence but didn't provide any evidence to refute anything I've posted. Like I said, he mention cult 3 times and he thinks that's enough to make up for his vacuous post. Vacuous meaning, having or showing a lack of thought or intelligence.

Let's play a game of genetic code trivia. Here's the genetic code, the atheist and materialist kryptonite.



Let's just look at one set of codons. There's 4 codons that code for the amino acid Valine(VAL). Those are GTT, GTC, GTA and GTG. Here's a couple of questions. I'm going to keep it simple.

When did the primordial soup or mud encode these 4 sequences with information about the amino acid Valine?

It's important to remember, this is just information, not the actual amino acid. From the genetic code, to the DNA sequence, to the MRNA, to the polypeptide chain, it's just encoded information being copied. The actually amino acid Valine doesn't come into play until the transfer rna attaches it to the polypeptide chain in the order it was arranged with other amino acids on the gene which is just encoded information.

So, how did anything natural learn information about the amino acid Valine and encode that information onto these 4 sequences?

This is what an intelligent mind does. We encode sequence with information and it's arbitrary. We can encode just about anything with information when we put it in a sequence.

I can say, if the grass is cut, we're staying in Atlanta another year before we move, but if the grass isn't cut, get ready to pack because we're moving to Miami next month.

I have encoded information on the sequence of grass cut/grass not cut. The grass, the lawnmower, the house are just storage mediums like DNA. These things contain no information and they know nothing about moving to Miami, staying in Atlanta, one month or a year. This information comes from the mind of the intelligent encoder and can be decoded by another intelligent mind or machinery designed to decode that information.

This is a huge, insurmountable problem for those who support a natural interpretation of evolution. You have to explain how nature can do what we can arbirarily do with just about anything. Encoding/decoding systems is what we use to build modern civilization and these systems protect encoded information from nature because nature destroys encoded information.

So again, you have to explain how this soup or mud encoded information about the amino acid Valine onto these 4 sequences and built machinery to decode these sequences, because the actual amino acid isn't seen until the encoded information goes from the gene to the polypeptide chain. How did this happen without an intelligent encoder?

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: TerraLiga

Notice how Terra thinks if he mentions cult in his post people will not see his post is devoid of any substance.

Some people insult those who disagree with them by questioning character or motives instead of focusing on the facts. Name-calling slaps a negative, easy-to-remember label onto a person, a group, or an idea. The name-caller hopes that the label will stick. If people reject the person or the idea on the basis of the negative label instead of weighing the evidence for themselves, the name-caller’s strategy has worked.

For example, in recent years a powerful antisect sentiment has swept many countries in Europe and elsewhere. This trend has stirred emotions, created the image of an enemy, and reinforced existing prejudices against religious minorities. Often, “sect” becomes a catchword. Keep in mind that “sect” is a synonym for “cult”.

That was from the article about propaganda that I used earlier (“The Manipulation of Information”). So that was the tactic called “Name-Calling”. Another tactic used in the same comment is also mentioned in the same article under “Making Generalizations”:

Another very successful tactic of propaganda is generalization. Generalizations tend to obscure important facts about the real issues in question, and they are frequently used to demean entire groups of people.

In this case, everyone who questions the evolutionary teachings regarding this subject is counted as being part of the same cult that supposedly “is dishonest” (i.e. everyone who in his opinion belongs to this cult is dishonest, a generalization). Just being counted as part of this supposed cult is already meant to demean.

a reply to: neoholographic

Sorry, but you are just wrong.

Everyone knows, and it is obvious on its face, that that extraordinarily complex structure referred to as DNA just happened by pure accident...

a reply to: tanstaafl

sorry that's also wrong. It didn't happen by accident it was a process and is an ongoing development.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
a reply to: neoholographic

Sorry, but you are just wrong.

Everyone knows, and it is obvious on its face, that that extraordinarily complex structure referred to as DNA just happened by pure accident...

It's exactly this assumption; that DNA suddenly appeared fully extrapolated as we see it today, that creationists pray on and depend on to dupe idiots into their cause.

Welcome to their club.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
a reply to: neoholographic

Sorry, but you are just wrong.

Everyone knows, and it is obvious on its face, that that extraordinarily complex structure referred to as DNA just happened by pure accident...

Exactly !

Magic mud acts just like an intelligent mind!

originally posted by: TerraLiga
The above was an appeal to incredulity. There is not a single piece of evidence to support those claims. There is plenty of evidence to refute those claims.

Neo and his cult members would have you believe that nothing so complex could come into exist on its own. Either through deliberate deception or from wilful ignorance Neo is not telling you that this genetic codon took billions of years to evolve into what we know today - into the charts that Neo repeated shows you.

This cult is dishonest. It has a history of faking claims and evidence to fit the narrative of its bible. Nothing not mentioned in its books can be allowed to exist for fear of discrediting its writings and therefore its rigid faith.

They are a cult.

I can flip the script and say your part of a cult too, Darwin's Cult, and every cult member that supports his theory.
But actually I would be using the term incorrectly, just like you are doing.

CULT-

a relatively small group which is typically led by a charismatic and self-appointed leader, who excessively controls its members, requiring unwavering devotion to a set of beliefs and practices which are considered deviant (outside the norms of society).

I don't see how people that examine the science behind evolution and decide it's not correct are part of any cult, who is their leader? Actually most of the Abrahamic religions believe in some type of creation, this is a very big number when you combine them all. And they all have different leaders as well.
Your definition of a cult is not based on what it really is, but your own mental emotionality, in other words your own world fantasy that makes your feel better about your personal perspective, it's pretty sad actually.

originally posted by: TerraLiga
a reply to: tanstaafl
It's exactly this assumption; that DNA suddenly appeared fully extrapolated as we see it today,

OF course it didn't... it took millions of years of one accident after another accident after another accident, each and every one building perfectly on the prior one, in millions of different species, all at the same time.

that creationists pray on and depend on to dupe idiots into their cause.

So... you're ass-u-me-ing that I'm a creationist (hint: I'm not) and calling me an idiot (is that against the TOS here on ATS?)?

a reply to: neoholographic

You get hung up on this "encoding" thing. What appears to be intelligent design is just a modern day simile of something so far superior to what we would call intelligence, that it cannot be adequately explained, by anyone on this planet.

Since the first synthesis of hydrogen... A system, the only real system we know, capable of endless self modification, essentially creating it's own reality and then endlessly stepping into it. It will never stop as much as it never began. It is in essence non describable. The only way we attempt to describe it, is to call it God.

Harvard stores 70 billion books using DNA
Research team stores 5.5 petabits, or 1 million gigabits, per cubic millimeter in DNA storage medium
www.computerworld.com...

Again, DNA is the most powerful storage medium we have ever seen and people really think this comes from a puddle of mud and a few lightning strikes?

Spot on. Good work in this thread - the evidence for intelligence is incontrovertible, I can't understand how anyone with any knowledge of biology whatsoever can believe that any aspect of the DNA encoding/decoding system is natural. It's blatantly the product of a guiding intelligence, there is no getting around it.

originally posted by: FlyInTheOintment

Harvard stores 70 billion books using DNA
Research team stores 5.5 petabits, or 1 million gigabits, per cubic millimeter in DNA storage medium
www.computerworld.com...

Again, DNA is the most powerful storage medium we have ever seen and people really think this comes from a puddle of mud and a few lightning strikes?

Spot on. Good work in this thread - the evidence for intelligence is incontrovertible, I can't understand how anyone with any knowledge of biology whatsoever can believe that any aspect of the DNA encoding/decoding system is natural. It's blatantly the product of a guiding intelligence, there is no getting around it.

There is zero evidence for intelligent design by a creator. It's only the creationists who express these views who completely disregard and dismiss science and biology.

The topic of this thread is just full misinformation and absolute nonsense.

I have been listening to a lot of science fiction lately.

People get hung up on evolution in a very dogmatic way, but the truth is we just don't know, not really.

The Kardashev Scale - Type I, II, III, IV & V Civilization is very interesting.

Because basically the higher classes of civilizations, transcend the physical form and can create at will.
From our perspective beings with non-physical bodies not within our physical dimension would be viewed as god's no matter what.

To truly believe in evolution I think you actually need to believe there is no higher intelligent civilizations anywhere in both the physical universe and the non-physical dimensions.

Basically you would need to believe the earth is the cradle of life for the entire universe, nobody on earth can know this for sure, so yes people do put their personal faith in the science of evolution, just as much as people can believe a class 5 civilization put man and woman on this earth.

originally posted by: NewGuy3
I have been listening to a lot of science fiction lately.

People get hung up on evolution in a very dogmatic way, but the truth is we just don't know, not really.

The Kardashev Scale - Type I, II, III, IV & V Civilization is very interesting.

Because basically the higher classes of civilizations, transcend the physical form and can create at will.
From our perspective beings with non-physical bodies not within our physical dimension would be viewed as god's no matter what.

To truly believe in evolution I think you actually need to believe there is no higher intelligent civilizations anywhere in both the physical universe and the non-physical dimensions.

Basically you would need to believe the earth is the cradle of life for the entire universe, nobody on earth can know this for sure, so yes people do put their personal faith in the science of evolution, just as much as people can believe a class 5 civilization put man and woman on this earth.

Evolution is a natural process and therefore applies to all forms of life no matter how basic or advanced they may are. Higher intelligent civilizations are subject to evolution and these biological entities evolved just like we evolved over billions of years. You don't really need to believe to evolution, it's not a religion. Just take a look at the evidence we have about how organisms evolved here on Earth.