Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sure you are which is why you ask the most egregious questions and use phrases that are not recognized in the scientific community.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
So you disagree with the government site I linked to concerning the billions and billions of coding in our DNA?
Not at all. I only disagree with your interpretation of what you read from that site.
If you really want to learn about the complex science of cells, DNA, RNA or anything that has to do with Evolution then I suggest you start attending college and register for Cell or Molecular Biology. Then add on Physics, Chem, Organic Chem, P-Chem, Biochem.
Then get back with us.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
I thought you were educated.
I am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Again, who coded it all?
Again you are not asking a valid question. You need to learn science so that you can ask questions appropriately.
Let me repeat: Natural Selection through Evolution/Genetic variation.
We know. Which is why creationists have to build their own universities and issue crap certificates.
You are failing to understand what your problem is. It is faith. The amount of complexity there is, is comprehensible and explicable. The order that allows all this crap to work together is comprehensible and explicable. That you push away all the explanation in a mix of denial and picking up irrelevant, misrepresented or simply denialist points in order to fabricate an argument from incredulity that is flaacious but which allows a convenient gap for God is quite clear to us.
it is frustrating that we can't get it over to you, but we do understand that faith creates a mental carapace that screens out anything that doesn't pass the faith screen.
Evolution is fully faith-based. It just falls a little bit from being a full blown religion which its scientists acting as a sort of priest craft with its adherents of the faithful.
You know what your problem is? You can't tell me Who coded the very first single cell with its billions of lines of coding. Remember, natural selection couldn't have coded it since it was the very first life on earth. A tornado could not have coded it. A chemical could not have coded it. A lightning bolt could not have coded it. Chance could not have coded it. The cell had to be fully coded from its start of creation to survive. Who coded it?
No, you read it. I'm way beyond that web site. So you disagree with the government site I linked to concerning the billions and billions of coding in our DNA?
I thought you were educated.
Again, who coded it all?
In terms of sheer chutzpah you're beyond it. The comparison between DNA code and computer code is at best analagous and a shorthand convenience -label and at worst (as you use it) as false and misleading as your other arguments from complexity and order. There are - by analogy - more subatomic particles than there are genomes in a chromosome. And one could also say that they, when they operate together in a bunch, convey encoded information. But this is not at all suggesting that somebody sat down and wrote a genetic computer program.
Only Creationists lighting on that word 'code' (they played the same trick with Zipf's law and the Fibonacci series) which they rip out of context without understanding or wanting to, use it for the purposes of providing a misrepresented argument that fits in with what they want to believe.
Sorry to use 'not understanding' so often, but that is almost always the problem - only getting the bits of the story that with some rethinking can be fitted into the Creationists faith -view.
It is like trying to explain the earth to a Babylonian who eventually says 'Got it..' the air is like earth breathing that holds the sky -dome up.'
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
Evolution is fully faith-based. It just falls a little bit from being a full blown religion which its scientists acting as a sort of priest craft with its adherents of the faithful.
You know what your problem is? You can't tell me Who coded the very first single cell with its billions of lines of coding. Remember, natural selection couldn't have coded it since it was the very first life on earth. A tornado could not have coded it. A chemical could not have coded it. A lightning bolt could not have coded it. Chance could not have coded it. The cell had to be fully coded from its start of creation to survive. Who coded it?
You again serve your own purposes by ignoring evidence which counts for everything and pretend it isn't there, and it's all based on faith. Yet another of the endless list of Theist apologetic fallacies.
The problem you refer to is yours, if you just stop to think about it instead of posting kneejerk dismissal..nothing much to do with DNA and mutation as the mechanics behind natural selection. And even the problem you refer to is really yours as there are some suggestions of mechanisms that make a Who unnecessary. That you can't bring yourself to see that this is actually more sense than a Who just doing it in some inexplicable manner then it really is your problem.
It would be ours if it really was important to get you to see it, but it isn't. It is to counter your footling and false arguments for the benefit of anyone who might (through sheer unfamiliarity with either the subject of the creationists tricks they use) be fooled into thinking it was some kind of good point.
P.s Maybe I'll leave it to Matadora to counter your wonderful new evolution - debunker.. natural selection could not have created DNA. I'll just say 'woinderful' and I won't even suggest you get that peer -reviewed and apply for your Nobel Prize, but take it to a Creationist site and see whether they buy it. But of course coming up with a real argument never mind real knowledge was never what this was about. It was about providing yourself with excuses to push away the fact of evolution.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-10-2015 at 02:40 PM..
Reason: jut a few editorials.
Originally Posted by Eusebius Again, who coded it all?
Matadora replied:
Quote:
Again you are not asking a valid question. You need to learn science so that you can ask questions appropriately.
Let me repeat: Natural Selection through Evolution/Genetic variation.
I thought you knew all about evolution.
How could the VERY FIRST single cell, the supposed precursor to ALL LIFE ON PLANET EARTH PRIOR TO ALL LIVE POOFING INTO EXISTENCE ON PLANET EARTH, how could it have used natural selection since it was the very first life? I don't expect an answer except more of your nasty comments.
how could there be natural selection for that single cell?
How could that single cell have evolved if it was the very first?
How could it have genetic variation if it was the first?
Who coded that single cell? It is the right question.
Nope, the white man had not invented natural selection until the 1800's.
The first cell could not have used "natural selection" since it was the first single cell and was fully coded and had its entire machinery etc. intact fully functional from the get go. So, Who coded that cell?
Look if you want to hold an intelligent discussion on these topics you need to have some understanding about them. It's clear you have NONE at all.
Again I suggest that you attend college and major in Cell or Molecular Biology and take these courses as well. Physics, Chem, Organic Chem, P-Chem, Biochem.
Thank you.
Now, Who coded that durn little cute single cell? You know, the very very very very FIRST cell ever to exist on planet earth? You can't say it evolved since it is the first. You can't say lightning and chemicals created it since lightning and chemicals don't have enough knowledge to even know what a cell is in the first place in order to build all the complex mechanisms in that cell. Who coded it?
How could the VERY FIRST single cell, the supposed precursor to ALL LIFE ON PLANET EARTH PRIOR TO ALL LIVE POOFING INTO EXISTENCE ON PLANET EARTH, how could it have used natural selection since it was the very first life? I don't expect an answer except more of your nasty comments.
how could there be natural selection for that single cell?
How could that single cell have evolved if it was the very first?
How could it have genetic variation if it was the first?
Who coded that single cell? It is the right question.
Not one question you have asked is valid or sensible.
Nasty comments? Like you telling a poster that their logic $uck$ or that they are so screwed up?
I think you meant to ask How do cells read Genes? vs. Who coded that single cell?
Here is a clue. RNA is self-replicating.
I have posted enough material for you. Now get to cracking on it!
Look if you want to hold an intelligent discussion on these topics you need to have some understanding about them. It's clear you have NONE at all.
Again I suggest that you attend college and major in Cell or Molecular Biology and take these courses as well. Physics, Chem, Organic Chem, P-Chem, Biochem.
See folks, this is what happens when someone just can't answer my simple question. They get nasty.
You see folks, evolutionists don't have an answer for such a simple question, just nasty, snarky remarks.
Who coded the first single cell? Someone had to. Lightning couldn't code it. A chemical soup in a pond couldn't have coded it. So Who coded it for it to run all the little machines inside that single cell? A tornado couldn't have coded it. Chance couldn't have coded it for the cell would have died in no time if it was trial and error to get the coding right.
You see folks, evolutionists just don't have the answer.
See folks, this is what happens when someone just can't answer my simple question. They get nasty.
There is NOTHING nasty about suggesting a major and courses that would help you to hold an intelligent discussion about the topics you keep misrepresenting.
I have posted more than enough information for you and have explained more than enough to you.
Now get to cracking on all that information that will help you to discover how much you really don't understand.
Not one question you have asked is valid or sensible.
Nasty comments? Like you telling a poster that their logic $uck$ or that they are so screwed up?
I think you meant to ask How do cells read Genes? vs. Who coded that single cell?
Here is a clue. RNA is self-replicating.
I have posted enough material for you. Now get to cracking on it!
But the questions are valid. Just because you are incapable of answering them does not mean they are not valid. They are very valid.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
