Evolution: The Deal Breaker

by Hadriel 150 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • cofty

    bakhbnerqbnetrqjhb0e9hg0i4g389gh4qbtn q0b=q3jmb0=m mnnrebt8hqgsbjnbhae0=ghvq

    Did that take intelligence?

  • WhatshallIcallmyself

    atomant - Yes, to make a letter such as this "L" does take intelligence and I know this due to my experience throughout life. And a code based on those letter is likewise a sign of intelligence for those same reasons.

    However, DNA does not contain letters or a code or anything like that at all. It only contain chemical compounds. That we observers give analogous definitions to those compounds for ease of understanding does not mean that those analogous definitions define DNA absolutely ...


    Beware of heading into logical fallacy territory with those type of arguments atomant.

  • Hadriel

    Holy crap I stepped away...that escalated quickly.

    Alright so let's take abiogenesis out of the equation for the moment. If RNA is the ticket I don't see how farming out its enzymatic tasks to proteins magically happened. There's a significant jump there for me that doesn't make sense.

    Additionally RNA can be synthesized by DNA and essentially carries out DNA's orders in carrying code from the nucleus via chain to proteins/ribosomes.

    In lay terms RNA is seems subordinate to DNA.

  • cofty

    Proteins are just chains of amino acids.

    Their function as an enzyme depends on their physical shape. Imagine an irregularly shaped ball with an indent that very approximately fits the shape of another molecule. However bad the fit it will increase the rate of chemical reaction. Over many generations further mutations will refine the shape and gradually increase efficiency.

    Perhaps there was a stage when RNA and proteins both played a similar role side-by-side with RNA increasingly taking on the role of translation of DNA.

    The point is that you won't get a definitive answer to these questions yet. Inserting an "intelligent designer" guarantees we will never find the real answer.

    As I said above, the fact of evolution in no way depends on the answers.

  • cofty
    off to bed, catch up tomorrow...
  • cleanideas
    I don't understand something complex, that means God did it. LOLS!
  • Hadriel

    Is DNA information or not? See this statement or question a lot. Here's my understanding based on general college education.

    DNA is comprised of nucleotides the ordering of the nucleotide groups is what we think of as to the genetic code or what makes the difference between an animal a human or various characteristics of either.

    So I would argue that it is true the DNA is not the "information" if you will it does contain the ordering of the various nucleotide groups which make us who we are and what we are.

    In coding you have various files that make a program. The ordering of those files and how they import is important or the code won't run or you'll get errors as a resource may not yet be defined. When it is called connected and compiled you have the resulting container which can be used to execute the code.

    To me DNA is that container.

  • cofty

    That would be a debate about a metaphor.

    DNA is just four chemicals doing what they do according to the laws of physics and chemistry.

    There is no actual information involved.

    Info is a top-down process. It starts with a mind who wants to communicate something using sounds or symbols whose meanings are recognised by other minds.

    DNA is a bottom-up process of replication.

  • Hadriel

    @cleanideas - no preconceived notions here and no one is injecting anything, well I'm not at least. I know you're kidding around but I've been thinking about starting this thread for a while, studying and preparing questions for feedback from others.

    The point being this is not a game for me not in the least. I'm serious about bouncing ideas. Looking to learn and draw reasonable conclusions.


    ...RNA increasingly taking on the role of translation of DNA

    I can sort of see this theory actually.

  • cofty

    In a similar way early amphibians had both gills and lungs that worked together. Gills in water and lungs to move across shallow swamps and between pools.

    Those who adopted a more terrestrial habitat gradually lost gills - except as a stage of embryology - and their lungs gradually evolved to take over the function of respiration completely.

    Embryonic gills evolved to become other parts of our inner ear and jaw.

    (now really off to bed.....)

Share with others