The code that is DNA

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

why?

'Why do Jews always answer a question with a question?'

'And how else should we answer it?' - my father-in-law

Boru

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Are any atheists curious at the hand and glove fitting between Dna code creation and the translation mechanics? Where else in Nature exists instructions being formed,transcribed and translated? In other words, what codes exist in nature without an intelligent agent? The code is represented by the arbitrary order of nucleotides , not the laws of chemistry.

You seem to be saying - correct me if I'm wrong - that the nucleotide sequence was designed by God.  If it's designed, then it isn't arbitrary.  If it's arbitrary, it can't have been designed.

Which way will you have it?

Boru

[Gwaithmir]

Are any atheists curious at the hand and glove fitting between Dna code creation and the translation mechanics? Where else in Nature exists instructions being formed,transcribed and translated? In other words, what codes exist in nature without an intelligent agent? The code is represented by the arbitrary order of nucleotides , not the laws of chemistry.

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).
   
   
3. Language, although symbolic, is still material. For a word to have meaning, the link between the word and its meaning has to be recorded somewhere, usually in people's brains, books, and/or computer memories. Without this material manifestation, language cannot work.
   

References:

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

http://www.talkorigins.org

[Foxaèr]

The irony of this failed theistic concept is that DNA is in no way perfect. Anything that is not perfect automatically excludes god from having created it, since he supposedly created perfection.

[Yukon_Jack]

Aren’t you curious that NOWHERE in nature does a code just create itself ?
Especially one that has a translation system and error correction system.
This at the very least is problematic to your foundations.
DNA works just like computer code, not an analogy but gets processed from a symbolic sequence into a working end product.
Again the order of nucleotides is NOT a product of the laws of chemistry, so then how did the sequence manifest?

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Aren’t you curious that NOWHERE in nature does a code just create itself ?
Especially one that has a translation system and error correction system.
This at the very least is problematic to your foundations.
DNA works just like computer code, not an analogy but gets processed from a symbolic sequence into a working end product.
Again the order of nucleotides is NOT a product of the laws of chemistry, so then how did the sequence manifest?

It's pretty clear that, in nature, a code DOES create itself.  We call it 'DNA'.

You should probably address the responses instead of just repeating yourself.

Boru

[Foxaèr]

Aren’t you curious that NOWHERE in nature does a code just create itself ?
Especially one that has a translation system and error correction system.
This at the very least is problematic to your foundations.
DNA works just like computer code, not an analogy but gets processed from a symbolic sequence into a working end product.
Again the order of nucleotides is NOT a product of the laws of chemistry, so then how did the sequence manifest?

You're full of what ifs.

All that matters is that life and DNA DID happen. The difference between attempting to understand why and simply attributing it all to a supernatural cause is a world of difference.

If you want to be an idiot, remain a theist.

If you want to be smart, think scientifically.

[Little lunch]

Hang on, this guy is smart and also a theist.
You're gonna have to deal with that KitKat. :-)

[Foxaèr]

Hang on, this guy is smart and also a theist.
You're gonna have to deal with that KitKat. :-)

I have yet to see any sign of intelligence from him, but maybe that's just me.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Are any atheists curious at the hand and glove fitting between Dna code creation and the translation mechanics? Where else in Nature exists instructions being formed,transcribed and translated? In other words, what codes exist in nature without an intelligent agent? The code is represented by the arbitrary order of nucleotides , not the laws of chemistry.

I suspect many things occurred and failed to take hold. A planet-sized laboratory would be fruitful.