I really hope he's not 47 That's an agent you don't want to meet.

I wonder, why not go to a science forum to try and learn more about DNA rather than an atheist forum? All are welcome here of course, and we have many scientists here as it happens.

What we're mainly seeing is flawed logic though, and no progress can be made until that's addressed.

(May 4, 2018 at 5:43 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 5:37 am)Mathilda Wrote: Ah yes the old micro-evolution bullshit. You cannot make the distinction between micro-evolution and macro-evolution.

All evolution works by taking small steps (i.e. micro-evolution). But the small steps accumulate over time. No theist who admits that micro-evolution takes place ever comes up with a suggestion as to why small steps can't accumulate over time to make big changes.

I don't believe there is evidence for a change of kinds or in macro-evolution.

But you believe micro-evolution works. So what mechanism is stopping small changes from accumulating over time to become big changes?

(May 4, 2018 at 2:48 am)CDF47 Wrote: DNA has a property that cannot be explained by natural processes.  Locked securely inside the double helix structure of DNA is a wealth of information in the form of precisely sequenced chemicals that scientists represent with the letters A, C, T, and G.  In a written language information is communicated by a precise arrangement of letters.  In the same way, the instruction necessary to assemble amino acids into proteins are conveyed by the sequences of chemicals arranged along the spine of the DNA.  This chemical code has been called the “Language of Life” and it is the most densely packed and elaborately detailed assembly of information in the known universe.

Is the intricate and yet seemingly endlessly variable design of snowflakes not an equal proof of a cosmic watchmaker?  Or is it, like DNA, just part of the wealth of detail we find when we look closely at the cosmos?  A sense of wonder is a good thing but a rush to judgement, not so much.

Does god "contain information", I wonder?

We've already covered how the "information" is merely our interpretation of the DNA, as 47 himself already said in the OP.

How would we recognize something that isn't designed from something that is? Anything I have in front of me could "contain information", whatever way I choose to analyse it. Everything else except DNA could similarly be interpreted in some way or another, so why focus on that? I could give letters to whatever things I like.

(May 4, 2018 at 5:51 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 5:40 am)Mathilda Wrote: Well considering that you know for sure what does and does not have information and what can and cannot process it, maybe you can enlighten us as to what exactly information is.

The attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something [snipped] that produce specific effects

(My editing to make it clearer what you are saying)


Right. Communicated. It has to be communicated. Which means that there needs to be something else identifying something as information and responding to it.

So you for example are identifying the DNA as information. Smoke signals for example is just smoke without someone looking out for it and responding to it having previously agreed that the smoke signal must mean something. But then this is distinct from the concept of information used in quantum mechanics which is very different from what you are talking about.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information

Quote:Information is any entity or form that resolves uncertainty or provides the answer to a question of some kind. It is thus related to data and knowledge, as data represents values attributed to parameters, and knowledge signifies understanding of real things or abstract concepts.[1] As it regards data, the information's existence is not necessarily coupled to an observer (it exists beyond an event horizon, for example), while in the case of knowledge, the information requires a cognitive observer.

What this means is you are the one determining that DNA carries information, and then saying that because it has information that there must be a designer.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 6:12 am)CDF47 Wrote: DNA contains information.  Information based on human observation always comes from a mind or an intelligence.  Therefore, DNA came from a Mind or Intelligence. 

Information within DNA is not based on human observation.

(May 4, 2018 at 3:45 am)CDF47 Wrote: Information always comes from a mind or intelligent being on this earth.  

Not true. You find information on climate in tree rings. You're not really prepared for this.

(May 4, 2018 at 6:16 am)Mathilda Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 5:43 am)CDF47 Wrote: I don't believe there is evidence for a change of kinds or in macro-evolution.

But you believe micro-evolution works. So what mechanism is stopping small changes from accumulating over time to become big changes?

I don't believe there is any proof for it.  I don't believe man descended from apes either.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 6:17 am)Whateverist Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 2:48 am)CDF47 Wrote: DNA has a property that cannot be explained by natural processes.  Locked securely inside the double helix structure of DNA is a wealth of information in the form of precisely sequenced chemicals that scientists represent with the letters A, C, T, and G.  In a written language information is communicated by a precise arrangement of letters.  In the same way, the instruction necessary to assemble amino acids into proteins are conveyed by the sequences of chemicals arranged along the spine of the DNA.  This chemical code has been called the “Language of Life” and it is the most densely packed and elaborately detailed assembly of information in the known universe.

Is the intricate and yet seemingly endlessly variable design of snowflakes not an equal proof of a cosmic watchmaker?  Or is it, like DNA, just part of the wealth of detail we find when we look closely at the cosmos?  A sense of wonder is a good thing but a rush to judgement, not so much.

It is the information problem that needs to be addressed here.  The snowflake is just an inanimate object.  Living systems contain such complex and specific information it boggles the mind.

And you have every right to your beliefs...

Trying to reconcile them with reality is where your deck of cards falls down every time...
Embrace reality. Fight the indoctrination....

The truth shall set you free.
God's truth shall make you a slave.

(May 4, 2018 at 6:22 am)robvalue Wrote: Does god "contain information", I wonder?

We've already covered how the "information" is merely our interpretation of the DNA, as 47 himself already said in the OP.

How would we recognize something that isn't designed from something that is? Anything I have in front of me could "contain information", whatever way I choose to analyse it. Everything else except DNA could similarly be interpreted in some way or another, so why focus on that? I could give letters to whatever things I like.

That would be Shannon Information.  DNA information is different from dumb Shannon Information because it performs function.

(May 4, 2018 at 6:45 am)CDF47 Wrote:

(May 4, 2018 at 6:16 am)Mathilda Wrote: But you believe micro-evolution works. So what mechanism is stopping small changes from accumulating over time to become big changes?

I don't believe there is any proof for it.  I don't believe man descended from apes either.

Here you go, evolution in progress.

---

(May 4, 2018 at 6:45 am)CDF47 Wrote: The snowflake is just an inanimate object.  Living systems contain such complex and specific information it boggles the mind.

Wrong. Snow is ice. Ice is not inanimate and will recrystalise over time if kept below freezing but with temperature fluctuations.