Perry have you been drinking? You seem more delusional than normal.
Bohm,
No, been home sick. I normally don't have time for sociopaths. Oooops I'm talking to you
Posts by Perry
-
154Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
Snare and Racket you have some similarities with sociopathy.....Perry
.................. Because he Disagrees with you??!!
Outlaw,
Of course not. When someone says that scientists who think the evidence points to a first cause can go enjoy themselves with bestaility like Snare and Racket did, I'm going to bring it to their attention just how offensive to polite humanity those kinds of statements really are. It IS sociopathic. And, it's nothing personal. I also stand by my views on the links of the dogmatism of Materialism with Sociopathy in light of current scientific knowledge of the DNA information coding systems.
So far, NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PROVIDED that suggest the DNA molecule is anything other than an advanced language coding, recepticle, reader, repair station, information distributer etc. and that the DNA Code Languages are in FACT coding languages like scientists have been saying for years and that we ALL learned about in the 6th grade for goodness sakes.
Amazing claims like the ones Snare and Racket makes about how The dna codes are only codes when you look at them, REQUIRE AMAZING PROF.
Who wrote the code?
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
It easy to confuse matter with information. They are different. They are non-sequiturs. The information in DNA is not the same as the storage vehicle:
DNA language not the same as DNA molecule
Recent studies in information theory have come up with some astounding conclusions—namely, that information cannot be considered in the same category as matter and energy. It's true that matter or energy can carry information, but they are not the same as information itself.
For instance, a book such as Homer's Iliad contains information, but is the physical book itself information? No, the materials of the book—the paper, ink and glue contain the contents, but they are only a means of transporting it.
If the information in the book was spoken aloud, written in chalk or electronically reproduced in a computer, the information does not suffer qualitatively from the means of transporting it. "In fact the content of the message," says professor Phillip Johnson, "is independent of the physical makeup of the medium" ( Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds , 1997, p. 71).
The same principle is found in the genetic code. The DNA molecule carries the genetic language, but the language itself is independent of its carrier. The same genetic information can be written in a book, stored in a compact disk or sent over the Internet, and yet the quality or content of the message has not changed by changing the means of conveying it.
As George Williams puts it: "The gene is a package of information, not an object. The pattern of base pairs in a DNA molecule specifies the gene. But the DNA molecule is the medium, it's not the message" (quoted by Johnson, p. 70).
So, in other words....even if one allows for the trillions of times of dis-probability regarding the chance formation of the DNA molecule as an incredibly eficient and tiny information storage, reading, repair, dissemination device, IT STILL DOESN'T ADDRESS WHERE THE INFORMATION COMES FROM.
More Defectors From Materialism
Back in Darwin's day, when his book On the Origin of Species was published in 1859, life appeared much simpler. Viewed through the primitive microscopes of the day, the cell appeared to be but a simple blob of jelly or uncomplicated protoplasm. Now, almost 150 years later, that view has changed dramatically as science has discovered a virtual universe inside the cell.
"It was once expected," writes Professor Behe, "that the basis of life would be exceedingly simple. That expectation has been smashed. Vision, motion, and other biological functions have proven to be no less sophisticated than television cameras and automobiles. Science has made enormous progress in understanding how the chemistry of life works, but the elegance and complexity of biological systems at the molecular level have paralyzed science's attempt to explain their origins" (Behe, p. x).
Dr. Meyer considers the recent discoveries about DNA as the Achilles" heel of evolutionary theory. He observes: "Evolutionists are still trying to apply Darwin's nineteenth-century thinking to a twenty-first century reality, and it's not working ... I think the information revolution taking place in biology is sounding the death knell for Darwinism and chemical evolutionary theories" (quoted by Strobel, p. 243).
Dr. Meyer's conclusion? "I believe that the testimony of science supports theism. While there will always be points of tension or unresolved conflict, the major developments in science in the past five decades have been running in a strongly theistic direction" (ibid., p. 77).
Dean Kenyon, a biology professor who repudiated his earlier book on Darwinian evolution—mostly due to the discoveries of the information found in DNA—states: "This new realm of molecular genetics (is) where we see the most compelling evidence of design on the Earth" (ibid., p. 221).
Just recently, one of the world's most famous atheists, Professor Antony Flew, admitted he couldn't explain how DNA was created and developed through evolution. He now accepts the need for an intelligent source to have been involved in the making of the DNA code.
"What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have been involved in getting these extraordinary diverse elements together," he said (quoted by Richard Ostling, "Leading Atheist Now Believes in God," Associated Press report, Dec. 9, 2004).
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
My claim is that Materialism as described in this thread and as dutifully demonstrated by Snare and Racket is sociopathic in nature.
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
Snare and Racket you have some similarities with sociopathy.
10 signs for spotting a sociopath
#1) Sociopaths are charming. Sociopaths have high charisma and tend to attract a following just because people want to be around them. They have a "glow" about them that attracts people who typically seek guidance or direction. They often appear to be sexy or have a strong sexual attraction.
See avatar
#2) Sociopaths are more spontaneous and intense than other people . They tend to do bizarre, sometimes erratic things that most regular people wouldn't do. They are unbound by normal social contracts. Their behavior often seems irrational or extremely risky.See avatar and references to vulgarity and bestaility
#3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others. This is why you will find many very "successful" sociopaths in high levels of government, in any nation.You are not ashamed of your absurdity
#4) Sociopaths invent outrageous lies about their experiences. They wildly exaggerate things to the point of absurdity, but when they describe it to you in a storytelling format, for some reason it sounds believable at the time.#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.
If you don't believe God exists why waste your time on threads such as this when you don't accept the premise and declare all scientists that do recognize the DNA code, as wrong and your far less plausible absurdity right?
#6) Sociopaths tend to be highly intelligent, but they use their brainpower to deceive others rather than empower them. Their high IQs often makes them dangerous. This is why many of the best-known serial killers who successfully evaded law enforcement were sociopaths.You are no doubt very intelligent, when it suits your purposes.
#7) Sociopaths are incapable of love and are entirely self-serving. They may feign love or compassion in order to get what they want, but they don't actually FEEL love in the way that you or I do.
#8) Sociopaths speak poetically . They are master wordsmiths, able to deliver a running "stream of consciousness" monologue that is both intriguing and hypnotic. They are expert storytellers and even poets. As a great example of this in action, watch this interview of Charles Manson on YouTube .
#9) Sociopaths never apologize. They are never wrong. They never feel guilt. They can never apologize. Even if shown proof that they were wrong, they will refuse to apologize and instead go on the attack.You are very good at attacking the messenger(s) and not the root of this discussion.
#10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it! Charles Manson, the sociopathic murderer, is famous for saying, "I've never killed anyone! I don't need to kill anyone! I THINK it! I have it HERE! (Pointing to his temple.) I don't need to live in this physical realm..."I think this is your defining characteristic. Against all possible claims to sanity: You simply declare DNA is not a coding language, and you believe it so. It is truth for you.
http://www.naturalnews.com/036112_sociopaths_cults_influence.html##ixzz2rAO4V4bA -
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
This is the problem that Snare and Racket has locked his brain up so tightly with ideological non-sense that it no longer functions properly:
How can one gain some conception of the size of such a huge number? According to most Evolutionists, the universe is less than 30 billion years old -- and there are fewer than 10 to the 18thPower seconds in 30 billion years. So, even if nature could somehow have produced trillions of genetic code combinations every second for 30 billion years, the probabilities against producing the simplest one-celled animal by trial and error would still be inconceivably immense! In other words, probabilities greatly favor those that believe an intelligent designer was responsible for originating even the simplest DNA molecules.
But never mind this problem, SnR has a priori - that forces acceptance of absurdity.
A few quotes:
Chemist Dr. Grebe: "That organic evolution could account for the complex forms of life in the past and the present has long since been abandoned by men who grasp the importance of the DNA genetic code."
Researcher and mathematician I.L Cohen: "At that moment, when the DNA/RNA system became understood, the debate between Evolutionists and Creationists should have come to a screeching halt...the implications of the DNA/RNA were obvious and clear....Mathematically speaking, based on probability concepts, there is no possibility that Evolution vs the mechanism that created the approximately 6,000,000 species of plants and animals we recognize today."
Evolutionist Michael Denton: "The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable, event. Such an occurrence would be indistinguishable from a miracle."
Famed researcher Sir Fred Hoyle is in agreement with Creationists on this point. He has reportedly said that supposing the first cell originated by chance is like believing "a tornado sweeping through a junk yard might assemble a Boeng 747 from the materials therein."
Many, if not most, origin-of-life researchers now agree with Hoyle: Life could not have originated by chance or by any known natural processes. many Evolutionists are now searching for some theoretical force within matter which might push matter toward the assembly of greater complexity. Most Creationists believe this is doomed to failure, since it contradicts the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics.
It is important to note that the information written on DNA molecules is not produced by any known natural interaction of matter. Matter and molecules have no innate intelligence, allowing self organization into codes. There are no know n physical laws which give molecules a natural tendency to arrange themselves into such coded structures.
Like a computer disk, DNA has no intelligence. The complex, purposeful codes of this "master program" could have only originated outside itself. In the case of a computer program, the original codes were put there by an intelligent being, a programmer. Likewise, for DNA, it seems clear that intelligence must have come first, before the existence of DNA. Statistically, the odds are enormously in favor of that theory. DNA bears the marks of intelligent manufacture.
Dr Wilder-Smith is an honored scientist who is certainly well-informed on modern biology and biochemistry. What is his considered opinion as to the source of the DNA codes found in each wondrous plant and animal? "...an attempt to explain the formation of the genetic code from the chemical components of DNA...is comparable to the assumption that the text of a book originates from the paper molecules on which the sentences appear, and not from any external source of information." " As a scientist, I am convinced that the pure chemistry of a cell is not enough to explain the workings of a cell, although the workings are chemical. The chemical workings of the cell are controlled by information which does not reside in the atoms and molecules of that cell. There is an author which transcends the material and the matter of which these strands are made. The author first of all conceived the information necessary to make a cell, then wrote it down, and then fixed it in a mechanism of reading it and realizing it in practice -- so that the cell builds itself from the information..."
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
you have called them liars for 6 pages....
That's hilarious I've quoted science sources from the beginning, and simply asked a question; one that you didn't like. The reality is that YOU ARE THE ONE that has in effect called far more educated people than yourself LIARS simply becasuse they observed a DNA CODE and called it such...that was their only crime that unleashed your disdainful condemnation.
To call this a code, is to misunderstand what just happened ! WE MADE THE CODE to differentiate things we observed....It doesn't mean it is a code laid down by someone!
Here you state that Codes, specifically referring to the DNA which virtually all scientists refer to as a code language EXCEPT YOU, only exists when someone observes it. You have referred to your own education as an appeal to authority. Yet, far more educated scientists disagree with YOU.
That assumption is based on out human perception that CODES and LANGUAGE are made by someone.
But, here because of the limiting nature of language, you are forced to assume that codes and language do in fact exist.... but only in the perception of someone. We can test that.
Can you name a code or language that is known to exist without anyone observing it? You'll get that one around 3am in the morning.
Here's another of your quotes about scientists who believe in a First Cause.
They can do science all day and go home and make love to Donkey's, the data they collate in the day still stands, and I for one will say no to El'Burro! ...Despite this it means jack shit to me.
Snare and Racket, in light of such filth, it is obvious that people, scientists, posters who are not like you are meaningless to you, especially if they ask questions that you feel with your superior world-view shouldn't be asking. If you talked like this in public face to face with real people, they would slap your face silly for speaking so sociopathic. But really when you are so deeply held captive to a concept, and proud of it, how could you not exibit forms of sociopathy like you do here?
Remember, this is your ideology - Materialism (that you so far haven't denied)
"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories , because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism. "- description by Professor Richard Lewontin, a geneticist
Forced to believe the absurd and proud of it.
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
Snare and Racket,
Were you aware that your mind-limiting materialist views are a minority among scientists? About two-thirds of scientists believe in God, according to a new survey by sociologists from Rice University.
Great Scientists who believed in God are manifold: Here's a partial list of some Noble Laureates just in the past hundred years:
PART I. Nobel Scientists (20-21 Century) Albert Einstein Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish Max Planck Nobel Laureate in Physics Protestant Erwin Schrodinger Nobel Laureate in Physics Catholic Werner Heisenberg Nobel Laureate in Physics Lutheran Robert Millikan Nobel Laureate in Physics probably Congregationalist Charles Hard Townes Nobel Laureate in Physics United Church of Christ (raised Baptist) Arthur Schawlow Nobel Laureate in Physics Methodist William D. Phillips Nobel Laureate in Physics Methodist William H. Bragg Nobel Laureate in Physics Anglican Guglielmo Marconi Nobel Laureate in Physics Catholic and Anglican Arthur Compton Nobel Laureate in Physics Presbyterian Arno Penzias Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish Nevill Mott Nobel Laureate in Physics Anglican Isidor Isaac Rabi Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish Abdus Salam Nobel Laureate in Physics Muslim Antony Hewish Nobel Laureate in Physics Christian (denomination?) Joseph H. Taylor, Jr. Nobel Laureate in Physics Quaker Alexis Carrel Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic John Eccles Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic Joseph Murray Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic Ernst Chain Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Jewish George Wald Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Jewish Ronald Ross Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Christian (denomination?) Derek Barton Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Christian (denomination?) Christian Anfinsen Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Jewish Walter Kohn Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Jewish Richard Smalley Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Christian (denomination?) PART II. Nobel Writers (20-21 Century) T.S. Eliot Nobel Laureate in Literature Anglo-Catholic (Anglican) Rudyard Kipling Nobel Laureate in Literature Anglican Alexander Solzhenitsyn Nobel Laureate in Literature Russian Orthodox François Mauriac Nobel Laureate in Literature Catholic Hermann Hesse Nobel Laureate in Literature Christian; Buddhist? Winston Churchill Nobel Laureate in Literature Anglican Jean-Paul Sartre Nobel Laureate in Literature Lutheran; Freudian; Marxist; atheist; Messianic Jew Sigrid Undset Nobel Laureate in Literature Catholic (previously Lutheran) Rabindranath Tagore Nobel Laureate in Literature Hindu Rudolf Eucken Nobel Laureate in Literature Christian (denomination?) Isaac Singer Nobel Laureate in Literature Jewish This is not to mention some of the greatest minds ever seen in previous centuries like Newton, Kepler, Bacon, Galelio etc. ; who were Christians.
Remember what Professor Lewontin has stated about Materialism.... statements which you do not deny but seem to welcome.
"It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes" ... materialism is an absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.
Surely to any lover of freedom, phrases like "Forced" and "materialism is an absolute" are enemies to free-minds and free thought . The notion that keeps being repeated among comitted materialists is that only they are responsible for science; this is proved false by FACTS. The opposite is true, an assumption of a superior intellect drives many scientists to look for patterns, logic, and systems inherent in creation, which they indeed find.
You are certainly welcome to your own views, but they are in the MINORITY among the educated, as well as compared to the world's population in general.
-
92
NASA Identifies The Hand of God
by Perry init even has what looks like blood flowing from a palm wound.
article.
world-renowned astrophysicist robert jastrow, founding director of nasas goddard institute for space studies, explains the fear of faith many of todays scientists experience.. there is a kind of religion in science, it is the religion of a person who believes there is order and harmony in the universe, and every effect must have its cause; [but] there is no first cause.
-
-
Perry
That statement seems a bit....paranoid
-
154
Who Made The Code?
by Perry ina few weeks ago, discoveries were made that show that there is another dna code language that rides on top of the already incredibly complex 4-letter code previously discovered.
this newly discovered code apparently regulates how genes work.
as i noted in a previous thread, the amount of data storage available in the dna storage system just the size of a pin-head would filll a stack of books stacked from your driveway to the moon .... 500 times!
-
-
Perry
Cofty and Snare/Racket are cell-mates
#10) Sociopaths are delusional and literally believe that what they say becomes truth merely because they say it! Charles Manson, the sociopathic murderer, is famous for saying, "I've never killed anyone! I don't need to kill anyone! I THINK it! I have it HERE! (Pointing to his temple.) I don't need to live in this physical realm..."