Does DNA contain digital information?

[CoxRox]

For a little background, if you want to use manufacturing analogies and apply them to biology, I;m a former DOD electronics MFG contractor, who now works as an Ag Research consultant. So, by all means, continue.

I know this video well. Darwinian posted it on my Irreducible Complexity thread a couple of years ago. Having re-watched this same video recently, I noticed Miller misrepresent Behe, or rather IC: if you notice at about 2.45 Miller claims that 'the individual parts have no function of their own. That's what irreducible complexity means'.

NO NO NO. That is NOT what irreducible complexity means or is saying. He misquotes Behe it would appear to me. Of the 40 or so 'parts' that make up the flagellum, 10 of those 'parts' are 'mini molecular machines' that are used in other organisms. I believe this is called co-option. I don't think Behe any where says that individual parts that make up an irreducibly complex system don't have 'individual functions' or rather 'can' have. I believe that of the 40 or so parts of the flageullum the 30 other parts DONT occur in other organisms. Quite where they're 'borrowed' from, I don't know.

As for Miller 'deducting' his '40' parts (he's working on the basis of 50 or so parts- different people use different numberings), he is left with a workable machine ie the typer 111 secretory system. Now he may have a point that this is a 'precursor' system, but this has not been proven yet, as far as I know. So what he is 'left with' is yes, a working 'machine'.

I emailed some web sites for further clarification regarding the type 111 ss a couple of weeks ago and I'm awaiting their replies.