Creationist argument about DNA and information

[sphenisc]

Are you seriously going to argue against improving accuracy of the measurements? Would you say the same about the speed of light? Is it only 299792.458 km/s "this week"?

Bad analogy. That is the speed of light by definition, not by measurement. The second is a measured quantity. The metre is defined as the distance light travels in 1/299792458th of a second.

 

[Daniel]

This exchange says it all. Daniel will not accept even the simplest and most straightforward scientifically based argument. "Who observed this dust/'ice 420,000 years ago...?" -- how absurd!

Thanks for the 'Color Commentary'. You gonna SUPPORT... as to "WHY" it's absurd @ some point...?

Scientifically Based??

Please post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then Experiment that validates 420,000 years...?
Highlight the "Independent Variable" used it the TEST....?

Crocheting is more "Scientifically Based", for goodness sakes.

regards

 

[Tolls]

Bad analogy. That is the speed of light by definition, not by measurement. The second is a measured quantity. The metre is defined as the distance light travels in 1/299792458th of a second.

Ah, but the speed of light used to be something different.
Hell, it's a better analogy than "DNA is like software"!

...possibly.

 

[Daniel]

So you are saying that their mere existence causes them to decay?

No, I'm asking what CAUSED their Existence in the first place...?

...and he created the universe out of...

Don't know, I wasn't there.

How did "Matter/Energy/ and Space create themselves out of nothing ??

Once again, I'm really sorry that you don't have enough of an understanding of quantum mechanics or virtual particles to address the argument.

I asked you 3 TIMES "Explicitly" to SUPPORT your claim of Virtual Particles.

Since you've "Wholesale Dodged" it 3 times; We'll just take it tacitly that you can't support what you say. mmm K?

regards

 

[Daniel]

Ah, but the speed of light used to be something different.

Straw Man Fallacy: I never made this argument. Please try and focus on my ACTUAL arguments rather than the ones you conjure. thanks

Hell, it's a better analogy than "DNA is like software"!

Another Straw Man. I never made that analogy, I said DNA CONTAINS SOFTWARE.

Software = Information.

regards

 

[Daniel]

Are you seriously going to argue against improving accuracy of the measurements?

Well measuring "SOMETHING" (Light) is a tad bit different than measuring a "Just So" Story (Billions of Years), don't ya think?

Would you say the same about the speed of light? Is it only 299792.458 km/s "this week"?

That's the Average "Two-Way Speed", and it's just a "Convention" that we've agreed upon.

regards

 

[Daniel]

The ToE can be summarised in a few short sentences as has been demonstrated repeatedly in this thread.

Where?? Post it then HIGHLIGHT IT...?


regards

 

[Daniel]

Uhh, Daniel, You are the one making a claim.

Which claim might that be, specifically...?

Hans

 

[Slowvehicle]

Thanks for the 'Color Commentary'. You gonna SUPPORT... as to "WHY" it's absurd @ some point...?

Scientifically Based??

Please post the Formal Scientific Hypothesis then Experiment that validates 420,000 years...?
Highlight the "Independent Variable" used it the TEST....?

Crocheting is more "Scientifically Based", for goodness sakes.

regards

Got it.

Your sect is soft on the whole "false witness" thing.

 

[Daniel]

So then, what is God? Matter? Energy??

Scripture says HE is Spirit. What that exactly is, I don't know.

A figment of your imagination???

Nope. Much like the Engineer/Designer of my car---(Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity), which I have never seen; but I know with 100% Certitude he's out there.

Have you observed "God"?

No.

If one cannot deduce something without personal observation (your argument about ice layers) then how does God exist without your personal (and mine, and every scientist out there...) observation??

By the Quintessential Attribute and Signature of Intelligent Agency....

Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity.

And others that have been elucidated in this thread.



regards

 

[sphenisc]

Where?? Post it then HIGHLIGHT IT...?


regards

For one:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11149787#post11149787

You can do your own highlighting.

 

[Perpetual Student]

Scripture says HE is Spirit. What that exactly is, I don't know.

"Scripture says ..." Really? Do you really find the superstions and myths of bronze age nomads more persuasive than modern scientific evidence?

 

[hecd2]

I admit it; I'm a playa.

Comments like that can make or mar a reputation

 

[Daniel]

Daniel,

I know you want to flit around like a gad-fly pretending to "disprove" every theory of modern physics and biology, but please don't forget the exchange we were having about the DNA translation process (last on my post 205).

SEE this post (That you "Wholesale Dodged", btw): http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=11153799&postcount=191

That crushed your cap'n kangaroo knowledge of the topic. Your Post, #205... CONFIRMED it.

1. Would you like to comment on the contradiction between these two statements of yours:

For the 2nd Time, No I'm not suggesting that. The Process/Mechanism is well known.
For the 3rd Time, I said there are NO Physico-Chemical Links between DNA and the Amino Acid or Instruction.

Ahhh, there is no contradiction... Whatsoever. Ya see, 'the process' of how we arrived @ C A T is well known and @ the SAME TIME there are no Physico-Chemical links. Voila

regards

 

[tsig]

I admit it; I'm a playa.

well that's a beach.

 

[Daniel]

"Scripture says ..." Really? Do you really find the superstions and myths of bronze age nomads more persuasive than modern scientific evidence?

Modern Scientific Evidences, like the Scientific Theory of evolution...?

Can you post that please...?

Can you validate that they are ACTUALLY superstitions and myths, in lieu of your 'Opinion'...?


regards

 

[jimbob]

Not really. The ToE can be summarised in a few short sentences as has been demonstrated repeatedly in this thread. What you're describing is evolutionary theory, the Modern Synthesis, which combines numerous theories, such as the theory of Common Descent, Mendelism, paleontology theories, population genetics,neutralism etc.
The simplicity of ToE is what caused Huxley to comment, "How extremely stupid not to have thought of that!"

Great minds think alike

Indeed. Any system that can self-replicate and which makes errors in its replication will be subject to natural selection if there are finite resources in its environment. It is more along the lines of a logical deduction than a mere theory.

As Huxley said, "How extremely stupid not to have thought of that". It is obvious in retrospect - something that completely changes the paradigm, as its elegance and simplicity.

 

[Darwin123]

"Scripture says ..." Really? Do you really find the superstions and myths of bronze age nomads more persuasive than modern scientific evidence?

Only some bronze age nomads. Bronze age nomads from the Middle East are obviously more credible than bronze age nomads from the Far East, or the Bronze Age myths of Egypt, or the bronze age of South America that came much later.

Anyway, how do you know that the Creation story in Genesis was written in the Bronze age? Some of these stories may have originated in the Stone Age. Maybe it was written in Babylon during the Iron Age! Also how do you know they were always nomads?

There is no chain of custody that enables us to trace the origins of myths and superstitions. The stories were probably shaped by multiple sources!

 

[Perpetual Student]

Modern Scientific Evidences, like the Scientific Theory of evolution...?

Can you post that please...?

Can you validate that they are ACTUALLY superstitions and myths, in lieu of your 'Opinion'...?


regards

It's quite laughable that someone who is blindly critical of scientific evidence and unaccepting of well thought out scientifically based arguments, can be so glib and utterly naïve about so called "scripture" -- which is nothing more than a collection of the superstitious musings and myths of an ignorant tribe of Bronze Age nomads. Face it Mr. Daniel, you have been caught with your intellectual pants down!

 

[Daniel]

For one:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=11149787#post11149787

You can do your own highlighting.

Alrighty then (From your Post link above)...

The Process of Evolution is the following abstract idea:
Begging The Question: "evolution", what's that? Please post the Scientific Theory of evolution...?

btw, Scientific Theories aren't 'ABSTRACT Ideas', they're birthed from Empirically Validated/Confirmed Scientific Hypotheses.


Given there is a population of things that reproduce, at different rates in different environments,
Given?? Who gave you this?? Ergo...Begging The Question.



Since all the rest (below) follow your 2 logically compromised premises above, they are Kaput:



"And those rates depend, statistically, on a collection of inheritable traits,

And those traits are subject to occasional mutations, some of which are then inherited,

Then one can deduce, from logic alone, without any need for evidence, that:

THEOREM: Each population will tend to increase the proportion of traits that have higher reproduction rates in its current environment, i.e. evolve.

The Theory of Evolution is that the listed preconditions apply to populations of biological organisms. And that therefore they evolve."


regards