Wingardium Leviosa
A great spell.
It's in Harry Potter.

(April 24, 2019 at 12:13 pm)sdelsolray Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 6:41 am)Gwaithmir Wrote: ...

Obviously biological complexity is beyond your understanding, as is the nature of genetic coding. To wit:

1. The genetic code is not a true code; it is more of a cypher. DNA is a sequence of four different bases (denoted A, C, G, and T) along a backbone. When DNA gets translated to protein, triplets of bases (codons) get converted sequentially to the amino acids that make up the protein, with some codons acting as a "stop" marker. The mapping from codon to amino acid is arbitrary (not completely arbitrary, but close enough for purposes of argument). However, that one mapping step -- from 64 possible codons to 20 amino acids and a stop signal -- is the only arbitrariness in the genetic code. The protein itself is a physical object whose function is determined by its physical properties.
   
   Furthermore, DNA gets used for more than making proteins. Much DNA is transcribed directly to functional RNA. Other DNA acts to regulate genetic processes. The physical properties of the DNA and RNA, not any arbitrary meanings, determine how they act.
   
   An essential property of language is that any word can refer to any object. That is not true in genetics. The genetic code which maps codons to proteins could be changed, but doing so would change the meaning of all sequences that code for proteins, and it could not create arbitrary new meanings for all DNA sequences. Genetics is not true language.
   
   
2. The word frequencies of all natural languages follow a power law (Zipf's Law). DNA does not follow this pattern (Tsonis et al. 1997).
   

References:

1. Tsonis, A. A., J. B. Elsner and P. A. Tsonis, 1997. Is DNA a language? Journal of Theoretical Biology 184: 25-29. 
   

The fact that genetic coding is functional does not, in any way, indicate the existence of a designer. Get an education, numb nuts.

Good post.  A few added points concerning protein formation:

1)  DNA does not directly code for proteins.  An inverse copy of one side (always the same side) of a portion of a DNA molecule is made into messenger RNA (mRNA).  Next, an inverse copy of that mRNA is made into transcription RNA (tRNA), which, in essence results in a copy of that certain side of the original DNA sequence at issue.

2)  61 of the 64 codons map for a specific amino acid.  Some codons map for the same amino acid and three function as stop codes.

3)  The tRNA then builds the specific protein to which the codons map.

4)  The folding of proteins is a function and property of how the amino acids are sequenced in the polypeptide chain/protein.

5)  The "left-handedness"  of proteins is due to the state of the tRNA (traced back to the side of the DNA molecule that was used to make mRNA.  Had the other side of the DNA molecule been used to make mRNA, proteins would all be "right-handed", and they would have been coded differently.

6)  I'm leaving aside the enzymatic chemistry during these processes for now.

Very good breakdown and explanation!  Thanks.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 12:39 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 9:28 am)CDF47 Wrote: That's your opinion.

---

Which you cannot even begin to refute.
You're a loser.
Tell Jesus to send in the A team, not a benchwarmer.

Funny.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 1:45 pm)Nomad Wrote:

(April 23, 2019 at 10:15 pm)CDF47 Wrote: I took science in school.  I seen enough of that BS.  I like reading about information in our cells and the most recent information we know.  Not a 20 - 30 year old out of date resource.

---

He sure does.  It is just due to man's rebellion and sin.  That's why it is just.

Oh, the sons of the Prophet are hardy and grim
And quite unaccustomed to fear
But none were so reckless of life or of limb
As Abdulla Bulbul Ameer.

Tell us the story so I don't have to look it up on my own.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 2:02 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 9:28 am)CDF47 Wrote: Man is wrong all the time though.  I will stick with what I believe is the Word of God.  It matches with how I feel inside.

I think you forget that you, too, are a man, and your conclusions are likely to be less reliable than those of science.

I am aware of my short comings but I know design when I see it.  I lived it for 5 years in college and 15 years in the office.

(April 24, 2019 at 1:45 pm)Nomad Wrote:

(April 23, 2019 at 10:15 pm)CDF47 Wrote: I took science in school.  I seen enough of that BS.  I like reading about information in our cells and the most recent information we know.  Not a 20 - 30 year old out of date resource.

---

He sure does.  It is just due to man's rebellion and sin.  That's why it is just.

Oh, the sons of the Prophet are hardy and grim
And quite unaccustomed to fear
But none were so reckless of life or of limb
As Abdulla Bulbul Ameer.

Ohhhhhhh, the sons of the prophet are hardy and smart, 
And quite unaccustomed to fear, 
But none were so feckless and ready to fart, 
As Abdulla and Omar with beer.

(April 24, 2019 at 6:39 pm)sdelsolray Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 12:29 pm)Peebo-Thuhlu Wrote: At work.

Wait..... if I'm reading you correctly Sdelsolray, then only 'Half' of the DNA chain/molecule is ever used?

What happens to other 'Right hand' (?) side of the DNA stuff?

Cheers.

Each side of a DNA double helix can precisely be deduced the other side because of the pairings of A, T, G, and C.  No information is lost when it is unzipped.  The advantage DNA has over RNA is that the double helix form is more stable, less mutatable, and can form much longer molecules.  The DNA functions I discussed above only deal with protein formation.  DNA behaves differently in mitosis (asexual reproduction) and in meiosis (sexual reproduction).

Some very good explaining.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 10:31 pm)Succubus Wrote: Hello CD-RW. Here's a few of your all loving god's nifty designs:

Onchocerca volvulus is a tiny worm that eats the retina of the human eye, causing blindness.

Loa loa is a tiny worm that eats.. see above.

Curiously, they only do this to human eyes; not cats, three toed sloths or anchovies, why only humans?

And don't forget the other horrors that plague the rest of the animal world:
Like this repulsive bastard of a thing.

So which is it.

1) God, who knows the outcome of every test, is testing us.
2) Us puny humans, apart from the ones speaking from the pulpit,  cannot fathom the workings of the almighty god.
3) It's total bollocks.

It's a fallen world.  We are designed to live, decay, and die and then on to everlasting life.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 11:05 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 2:02 pm)CDF47 Wrote: [quote pid='1903782' dateline='1556112516']

Man is wrong all the time though.  I will stick with what I believe is the Word of God.  It matches with how I feel inside.

Me too. 
Whenever I feel like killing disobedient children, and dashing infants on rocks. 
Psalm 137:9  Happy is the one who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks ?

[/quote]
The psalmist's intrusive thoughts are even portrayed in the Bible when faced with a heathen enemy.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 11:06 pm)Kit Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 11:04 pm)CDF47 Wrote: It's in the Bible that we descend from Adam and Eve; one man and one woman.

Lots of nonsensical, unrealistic things are in the bible.

I believe the Bible is the Word of God.

---

(April 24, 2019 at 11:10 pm)Bucky Ball Wrote: Wingardium Leviosa
A great spell.
It's in Harry Potter.

What?

(April 24, 2019 at 11:18 pm)CDF47 Wrote: I believe the Bible is the Word of God.

Of course, it's no surprise that what you believe doesn't correlate with reality.

The Word of Dumbledore, after all, is just as awesome and possibly even more so when fictionally reflected upon.

(April 24, 2019 at 11:24 pm)Kit Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 11:18 pm)CDF47 Wrote: I believe the Bible is the Word of God.

Of course, it's no surprise that what you believe doesn't correlate with reality.

The Word of Dumbledore, after all, is just as awesome and possibly even more so when fictionally reflected upon.

Mock and scoff all you want.  The Bible predicts the future in prophecy numerous times.  The only book that accurately does that.  In particular the Book of Daniel is amazing if you are interested.

(April 24, 2019 at 11:33 pm)CDF47 Wrote: Mock and scoff all you want.  

Thank you for the permission, Chancellor Roderick.

(April 24, 2019 at 11:33 pm)CDF47 Wrote:

(April 24, 2019 at 11:24 pm)Kit Wrote: Of course, it's no surprise that what you believe doesn't correlate with reality.

The Word of Dumbledore, after all, is just as awesome and possibly even more so when fictionally reflected upon.

Mock and scoff all you want.  The Bible predicts the future in prophecy numerous times.  The only book that accurately does that.  In particular the Book of Daniel is amazing if you are interested.

It also fails just as often, if not more. 
Deuteronomy forbade omen reading. 
Prophesy was not predicting the future.

Matthew 16: 1 The Pharisees and Sadducees came to Jesus and tested him by asking him to show them a sign from heaven. 2 He replied, “When evening comes, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red,’3 and in the morning, ‘Today it will be stormy, for the sky is red and overcast.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4 A wicked and adulterous generation looks for a sign, but none will be given it except the sign of Jonah.” Jesus then left them and went away.

CDF is part of the wicked and adulterous generation ... he looks for signs.
Jebus no likey that shit.

(April 24, 2019 at 12:13 pm)sdelsolray Wrote: Obviously biological complexity is beyond your understanding, as is the nature of genetic coding. To wit:


Good post.  A few added points concerning protein formation:

1)  DNA does not directly code for proteins.  An inverse copy of one side (always the same side) of a portion of a DNA molecule is made into messenger RNA (mRNA).  Next, an inverse copy of that mRNA is made into transcription RNA (tRNA), which, in essence results in a copy of that certain side of the original DNA sequence at issue.

2)  61 of the 64 codons map for a specific amino acid.  Some codons map for the same amino acid and three function as stop codes.

3)  The tRNA then builds the specific protein to which the codons map.

4)  The folding of proteins is a function and property of how the amino acids are sequenced in the polypeptide chain/protein.

5)  The "left-handedness"  of proteins is due to the state of the tRNA (traced back to the side of the DNA molecule that was used to make mRNA.  Had the other side of the DNA molecule been used to make mRNA, proteins would all be "right-handed", and they would have been coded differently.

6)  I'm leaving aside the enzymatic chemistry during these processes for now.

Ah.

Re-reading the post now that I'm free-er allows me to better understand it.

I think I have a better udnerstanding of what's going on.

So... I supose my follow up question is.

First the DNA 'Unzips'.
Parts of one length are 'read' and made into RNA.
This RNA in turn is then turned into actual 'productive' RNA?

So.. the original DNA is just zipped back up after wards?

Cheers.

Not at work.

Delete post.