(May 21, 2016 at 3:55 pm)AAA Wrote:(May 21, 2016 at 3:09 pm)wiploc Wrote: But that's metaphor, right? Without the metaphor, we'd say something like, "Chemicals in the cell react to other chemicals."
If you don't mean it as a metaphor, if you think the chemicals are literal information, then you have a circular argument: In order for chemicals to be information, you must think that they carry a message from one intelligence to another. Something like that. You are building your conclusion into your premises, begging the question of whether chemistry is really information.
Well they do contain information. They aren't information. A book isn't information, but it can contain it.
Why must I think they carry a message from one intelligence to another? That doesn't follow. But there are enzymes that read the code and use it to build other enzymes. It definitely contains information, I hope you aren't going to argue that it doesn't. Yeah it's all based on chemistry and physics, but that doesn't change the fact that it possesses information.
You claim that snowflakes are designed, and then it turns out that all you mean is that they are regular. I'm going to assume that a discussion of "information" would come out the same way.