RE: The code that is DNA
January 13, 2020 at 8:12 pm
(This post was last modified: January 13, 2020 at 8:29 pm by BrianSoddingBoru4.)
(January 13, 2020 at 6:48 pm)Simon Moon Wrote:(January 10, 2020 at 12:27 pm)Yukon_Jack Wrote: You haven’t even seen tours video yet you proclaim falsely of a straw man. You are a classic case of dishonest stupidity!
When your friends here can’t combat honestly , they resort to childish name calling,
Very little cerebral activity here
If you found something that looked like a piece of metal , would you assume an automobile would inevitably be created from it? There is no such thing as a simple cell and Tour highlights the profound impossibility of abiogenesis
(January 13, 2020 at 4:18 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: This bit is nonsense on the face of it. Cells vary in complexity, and some are 'simpler' than others.
Boru
This creationist claim that complex cells, like we see today, couldn't have come about via natural processes, is, among other things, al strawman.
No scientist is claiming that the first cells were anywhere as complex as the cells we see today, with their: organelles, microtubules, vacuole, etc already extant in early cells.
All that first cells were most likely constituted of, is RNA, lipid membrane, and a fluid.
I was actually thinking of the difference between pro- and eukaryotic cells. It seems pretty obvious that a cell without membrane-bound organelles is necessarily simpler than a cell that has them.
Boru
‘But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods or no gods. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.’ - Thomas Jefferson