Bible Discussion: Genetic Information

Genetic Information
Posts: 10

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1   (First | Last)

IknowHimDoYou
2003-09-29 11:20:04 EST
Genetic Information

While science has uncovered the structure and even some of the functions
of RNA and DNA it still cannot account for how and how much of the code
is used. Mapping something and explaining how it works are two different
endeavors. We do have some clues and we can see some of these functions,
however, it is as if someone pulls a string of yarn on a sweater. With
the pull all sorts of other things come unravelled and we can do more harm
than good(e.g., placing genetic material in the brains of Alzheimers
victims-it killed them!). My son when young loved to take things apart
but he did not have the skill needed to put them back together so they
would work. We can take dead creatures apart but we cannot put them
together again and give them life.

The faith of evolutionary religion is based upon this forementioned
sweater not unravelling itself but in creating itself so to speak. For
this to occur a great deal of information(and not just letters thrown in
but letters arranged in very specific order- form and function) must
increase with each evolutionary step in going from simple to complex. To
get from inorganic chemicals(it has to start at the most basic level) and
progress up to man would require tremendous amounts of meaningful
information to be assembled and arranged and then reproduced by another
just as incredible process of information just to come up with a simple
single cell.

This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible. Increase
in information at the apobetic level cannot occur unless an outside
assembler or designer arranges it and without such guidence inorganic
chemicals to you is impossible dispite all the shouting and arguing of the
faithful.

There are no perpetual motion machines folks..

David Jensen
2003-09-29 11:25:35 EST
In alt.talk.creationism, IknowHim@leavingsoon.com (IknowHimDoYou) wrote
in <IknowHim-2909030820040001@pm3-47.kalama.com>:

>Genetic Information

Once again a critic of science shows his utter ignorance of what he
criticizes.

>While science has uncovered the structure and even some of the functions
>of RNA and DNA it still cannot account for how and how much of the code
>is used. Mapping something and explaining how it works are two different
>endeavors. We do have some clues and we can see some of these functions,
>however, it is as if someone pulls a string of yarn on a sweater. With
>the pull all sorts of other things come unravelled and we can do more harm
>than good(e.g., placing genetic material in the brains of Alzheimers
>victims-it killed them!). My son when young loved to take things apart
>but he did not have the skill needed to put them back together so they
>would work. We can take dead creatures apart but we cannot put them
>together again and give them life.

When certain biochemical processes, eg living, stop, other biochemical
processes occur.

>The faith of evolutionary religion is based upon this forementioned
>sweater not unravelling itself but in creating itself so to speak. For
>this to occur a great deal of information(and not just letters thrown in
>but letters arranged in very specific order- form and function) must
>increase with each evolutionary step in going from simple to complex. To
>get from inorganic chemicals(it has to start at the most basic level) and
>progress up to man would require tremendous amounts of meaningful
>information to be assembled and arranged and then reproduced by another
>just as incredible process of information just to come up with a simple
>single cell.

Please explain how your claim has anything to do with abiogenesis or
evolution.

>This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
>reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible. Increase
>in information at the apobetic level cannot occur unless an outside
>assembler or designer arranges it and without such guidence inorganic
>chemicals to you is impossible dispite all the shouting and arguing of the
>faithful.

Repeating old, discredited stories of the anti-science crowd will not
make them true. Learn some science before you criticize it.

>There are no perpetual motion machines folks..

And only those who have no idea how life works would try to equate them.

Tom
2003-09-29 12:15:57 EST

"IknowHimDoYou" <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-2909030820040001@pm3-47.kalama.com...
> Genetic Information
>
> While science has uncovered the structure and even some of the functions
> of RNA and DNA it still cannot account for how and how much of the code
> is used. Mapping something and explaining how it works are two different
> endeavors. We do have some clues and we can see some of these functions,
> however, it is as if someone pulls a string of yarn on a sweater. With
> the pull all sorts of other things come unravelled and we can do more harm
> than good(e.g., placing genetic material in the brains of Alzheimers
> victims-it killed them!). My son when young loved to take things apart
> but he did not have the skill needed to put them back together so they
> would work. We can take dead creatures apart but we cannot put them
> together again and give them life.
>
> The faith of evolutionary religion is based upon this forementioned
> sweater not unravelling itself but in creating itself so to speak. For
> this to occur a great deal of information(and not just letters thrown in
> but letters arranged in very specific order- form and function) must
> increase with each evolutionary step in going from simple to complex. To
> get from inorganic chemicals(it has to start at the most basic level) and
> progress up to man would require tremendous amounts of meaningful
> information to be assembled and arranged and then reproduced by another
> just as incredible process of information just to come up with a simple
> single cell.
>
> This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
> reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible. Increase
> in information at the apobetic level cannot occur unless an outside
> assembler or designer arranges it and without such guidence inorganic
> chemicals to you is impossible dispite all the shouting and arguing of the
> faithful.
>
> There are no perpetual motion machines folks..

Tom: No, there are only fools like you.



Adam Marczyk
2003-09-29 13:08:21 EST
IknowHimDoYou <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-2909030820040001@pm3-47.kalama.com...

[...]

> This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
> reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible.

Here are some observed mutations that increase genetic information:

Ohno, S. "Birth of a unique enzyme from an alternative reading frame of the
preexisted, internally repetitious coding sequence." _Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America_, vol. 81, no.
8, p. 2421-2425.

Nylon is a man-made chemical compound, one that did not exist in nature in
any form until 1935. However, a strain of bacteria, Flavobacterium sp.K172,
has been discovered that can break down nylon oligomers and use them as its
sole source of carbon. (It was first found growing in waste water ponds
behind nylon-producing factories.) Further study revealed that the bacteria
has evolved a completely new enzyme to do this - an enzyme, furthermore,
that arose from a genome-scrambling change called a frame shift mutation.
The paper I cited above gives the sequence of the original gene at that
locus and the new one that produces the nylon-digesting enzyme, showing how
they differ by only a few base pairs.

Here is another example:

Copley, S. "Evolution of a metabolic pathway for degradation of a toxic
xenobiotic: the patchwork approach." _Trends in Biochemical Sciences_, vol.
25, June 2000, p. 261-265.

Pentachlorophenol is a man-made pollutant; it is highly toxic, and its
chemical makeup is very unlike most natural substances (it contains a large
number of chlorine atoms, an element which is rare in biotic chemistry),
making it resistant to biodegradation. Like nylon, it did not exist in
nature until a few decades ago. Nevertheless, we have come across a species
of bacteria, _Sphingomonas chlorophenolica_, that has evolved a multi-step
pathway of novel enzymes to break it down, first stripping the toxic
chlorine atoms off the molecule and replacing them with more benign
compounds, finally cleaving its ring-shaped structure and rendering it
harmless. The cited article investigates the origin of the enzymes that
perform this task by comparing their sequence similarity to other genes in
the bacterium's genome that previously existed to perform different
functions. As I said, gene duplication followed by subsequent
diversification gives rise to new, complex adaptations.

Here's a third:

Rice, Louis. "Evolution and clinical importance of extended-spectrum
beta-lactamases." _Chest_, 2001, 119:391S-396S.

Penicillin and synthetic variants such as cefotaxime are called beta-lactam
antibiotics, so named for their defining structural feature, the
beta-lactam ring. However, many species of bacteria have evolved resistance
to these antibiotics through the production of new enzymes called
beta-lactamases, which break apart (hydrolyze) the beta-lactam ring and
render the molecule harmless. Pharmaceutical development continues with the
so-called extended spectrum beta-lactam antibiotics, which add bulky side
chains onto the antibiotic molecule to block bacterial beta-lactamases, but
new enzymes capable of overcoming them are constantly appearing. Only 3
beta-lactamases were known in 1982; today, there are over 60. The article
discusses how single nucleotide substitutions in certain beta-lactamase
genes can dramatically increase their potency; for example, two amino acid
changes in the resistance enzyme TEM-1 can change it to TEM-26, the most
potent beta-lactamase known against the antibiotic ceftazidine, multiplying
its potency hundreds of times.

And here's a final example, this one from a creature whose genome has been
completely sequenced:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/information/apolipoprotein.html

Apolipoprotein AI is a major component of HDL, the "good cholesterol" in
the human bloodstream. A few years ago, a community in Italy was discovered
to have a mutant version of this protein, AI-Milano, that's significantly
better at these tasks, decreasing blood cholesterol and mopping up arterial
plaques. AI-Milano also has an entirely novel function that ordinary
apolipoprotein AI does not have: it is an antioxidant, reducing damage
caused by inflammation. The beneficial effects of AI-Milano, reducing the
risk of arteriosclerosis, heart disease and stroke, were apparent even
against the background of a country with much lower rates of heart disease
in general than the U.S.

Another creationist who asserted that there were no mutations that
increased genetic information grew strangely silent when showed this list;
he has yet to reply to it in any way. Perhaps you'd like to step up to the
plate for him and pinch hit?

--
"We have loved the stars too fondly | a.a. #2001
to be fearful of the night." | http://www.ebonmusings.org
--Tombstone epitaph of | e-mail: ebonmuse!hotmail.com
two amateur astronomers, | ICQ: 8777843
quoted in Carl Sagan's _Cosmos_ | PGP Key ID: 0x5C66F737
----------------------------------------------------------------------


Thore Schmechtig
2003-09-29 13:25:37 EST
> The faith of evolutionary religion is...

nonexistent.

> This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
> reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible.

Wrong.

> There are no perpetual motion machines folks..

Just as there is no religion of "evolutionism".

Pity that you're back again to your usual behavior.

UNWRITTEN RULES OF FUNDAMENTALISM

1. "I'm right and you are wrong".
2. Never admit that you are wrong, even if you really are.
3. When you have nothing to say, hurl insults.
4. Regard and portray your own violence, whether physical,
psychological,
or verbal, at all times as defensive
5. Be prepared at all times to lie and bluster, particularly when backed
into a corner in an argument
6. Never accept responsibility for any mess you have personally caused.
7. When you are forced to admit to an error, regard the whole process of
error and correction as part of God's personal plan for you and not as a
something for which you should apologise retract or make amends except
verbally and secretly to God himself
8. Always see yourself and you personal actions as part of God's plans
for
the world. Recognise that even your errors are just part of Gods will
for
the betterment of mankind.
9.Profess humility but avoid the actual experience of it.
10.Refuse to take in information that differs from your own view and
oppose all such information through classification of such information
in
a derogatory and simplistic manner(eg by categorising it as left wing
propaganda)
11.Refuse to accept that truth is not black and white; that reality is
complex and there are shades of grey
12.Refuse to forgive anyone else for anything unless you purport to
forgive on behalf of other people unconnected with you for whom you
don't
have that right anyhow.

Zachriel
2003-09-29 13:49:31 EST

"IknowHimDoYou" <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-2909030820040001@pm3-47.kalama.com...
> Genetic Information
>
> While science has uncovered the structure and even some of the functions
> of RNA and DNA it still cannot account for how and how much of the code
> is used. Mapping something and explaining how it works are two different
> endeavors. We do have some clues and we can see some of these functions,
> however, it is as if someone pulls a string of yarn on a sweater. With
> the pull all sorts of other things come unravelled and we can do more harm
> than good(e.g., placing genetic material in the brains of Alzheimers
> victims-it killed them!). My son when young loved to take things apart
> but he did not have the skill needed to put them back together so they
> would work. We can take dead creatures apart but we cannot put them
> together again and give them life.

This issue was dealt with much more creatively and much more honestly by
Mary Shelley in her novel, Frankenstein, The Modern Prometheus (1818).


>
> The faith of evolutionary religion

No such thing. The rest of your post is a false use of information theory
and is refuted by the facts of modern genetics.


> is based upon this forementioned
> sweater not unravelling itself but in creating itself so to speak. For
> this to occur a great deal of information(and not just letters thrown in
> but letters arranged in very specific order- form and function) must
> increase with each evolutionary step in going from simple to complex. To
> get from inorganic chemicals(it has to start at the most basic level) and
> progress up to man would require tremendous amounts of meaningful
> information to be assembled and arranged and then reproduced by another
> just as incredible process of information just to come up with a simple
> single cell.
>
> This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
> reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible. Increase
> in information at the apobetic level cannot occur unless an outside
> assembler or designer arranges it and without such guidence inorganic
> chemicals to you is impossible dispite all the shouting and arguing of the
> faithful.
>
> There are no perpetual motion machines folks..



Lane Lewis
2003-09-29 14:50:55 EST

"IknowHimDoYou" <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-2909030820040001@pm3-47.kalama.com...
> Genetic Information
>
>snip
>
> This increase in information has never been observed by anyone and most
> reasonable scientists will admit that it is actually impossible.

All scientist admit it's impossible because the type of information you
referring to does not exist. The idea that a god implanted some form of
information into each molecule of DNA that prevents speciation has no basis
in fact and is just fundamentalist religious nonsense.

In fact it's been demonstrated to be wrong so why do you keep repeating it.

You can of course try to provide a citation to prove me wrong but I yet to
see you provide anything to back up these statements even though you've been
making them for a long time.

What does your God say about being truthful.

Lane

snip



Mefix
2003-09-29 15:11:04 EST
IknowHimDoYou wrote:

[ Snip ]


Is cutting 'n' pasting the only weapon you have in your crusade to
"discredit" science and scientifically-minded individuals? You never,
ever write anything original and you never answer questions which are
put to you. All in all you're just another religious oddball, incapable
of critical, independent thought; I feel sorry for you.


Tom
2003-09-29 16:18:53 EST

"Mefix" <mefix@127.0.0.1> wrote in message
news:bla048$2ie$1@sparta.btinternet.com...
> IknowHimDoYou wrote:
>
> [ Snip ]
>
>
>Mefix: Is cutting 'n' pasting the only weapon you have in your crusade to
> "discredit" science and scientifically-minded individuals? You never,
> ever write anything original and you never answer questions which are
> put to you. All in all you're just another religious oddball, incapable
> of critical, independent thought; I feel sorry for you.

Tom: This bot's name is YM1. He has posted for a year or two of which I'm
aware. Believe me, I am surprised that he is able to cut n paste. His own
posts are real a hoot though and you really should keep after him to post on
his own :-).



Editor Of EvilBible.com
2003-09-29 23:10:10 EST

"IknowHimDoYou" <IknowHim@leavingsoon.com> wrote in message
news:IknowHim-2909030820040001@pm3-47.kalama.com...
> Genetic Information
>
> While science has uncovered the structure and even some of the functions
> of RNA and DNA it still cannot account for how and how much of the code
> is used. Mapping something and explaining how it works are two different
> endeavors. We do have some clues and we can see some of these functions,
> however, it is as if someone pulls a string of yarn on a sweater. With
> the pull all sorts of other things come unravelled and we can do more harm
> than good(e.g., placing genetic material in the brains of Alzheimers
> victims-it killed them!). My son when young loved to take things apart
> but he did not have the skill needed to put them back together so they
> would work. We can take dead creatures apart but we cannot put them
> together again and give them life.

I guess you never saw this article where scientists created a living virus:
"Cello, J; Paul, A; Wimmer, E, Chemical Synthesis of Poliovirus cDNA:
Generation of Infectious Virus in the Absence of Natural Template, Science
2002 297: 1016-1018"
http://www.evilbible.com/Synthetic%20Life.htm


Page: 1   (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron