Re: Evolution and Observation Gap


Robert J. Kolker wrote:
Alan Wostenberg wrote:



Historically, it was in regarding it as an alphabet or a coding problem
in which Crick & Watson made their breakthrough {1}. How would you
explain the unreasonable effectiveness of the treating it as a coding
problem, if the genetic code is just a human convenience, not real
code?

Historically it was a molecule discovered by Ros Franklin using X
interferometry (for which she never got full credit by the way).

What do you mean by "never got full credit"? I suspect you may be
refering to the Nobel prize story. Watson & Crick got their Nobel in
1962. Franklin died in 1956. Nobels are not given posthumously. But
maybe you are refering to something else?

I certainly agree that when anyone thinks of the discovery of DNA they
think of Watson and Crick and NOT of Franklin. But no one remember
Maurice Wilkins either. He shared the Nobel with Watson & Crick -and of
the three, he was the only one to acknowledge in his Nobel lecture the
early work of Franklin. She definately contributed to the discovery, so
in that sense she didn't receive the *same* credit....but nor is she
due it......

The
Watson and Crick worked out the chemical and molecular details in the
context of chemistry, complete with molecular bonds. It was only later
that people analogized DNA to codes. Hence the term codons was
introduced. As with ALL analogies caution must be excercised NOT to take
them literally.

Your sense of history is as flawed as your analogy. It were better if
you learned some facts before pontificating about the issue. So far you
have revealed yourself to be a C- student in the art of critical
thinking. I hope you code software better than you pontificate about
genetic science and molecular chemistry. DNA works by folding and
binding. Purely natural processes. No "coder" in sight. It is all
physical processes at work.

Bob Kolker

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Celebrating birthday of Rosalind Elsie Franklin
    ... Watson and Crick might not have been first with correct double-helix ... Nobel stipulated that only three can share his prize. ... would have resulted from bypassing Rosalind Franklin too. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... Watson and Crick worked out the chemical and molecular details in the ... Your sense of history is as flawed as your analogy. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Oh yeah -- and Islam didnt give us arabic numerals
    ... Watson and Crick on line one. ... But they didn't do the science. ... She didn't get the Nobel ...
    (rec.sport.football.college)
  • Re: my name is tom potter, and i am a moron
    ... Newton, Faraday, Edison, Galileo, Volta, Watson and Crick. ... Forty years after their discovery of DNA's secret, ... Thanks to genetics, the pharmaceutical industry is exploding with new ideas ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: The Darwinian Fairytale as "Science"
    ... life as designer, amongst them Crick. ... Basic History of Science does no such thing. ... advocating space aliens to have originally introduced life on our ...
    (talk.origins)