Chez Wat: "If DNA is created, so is life"

On Nov 12, 1:31 pm, wf3h <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Nov 12, 1:24 pm, Seanpit <sean...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Nov 11, 4:39 pm, wf3h <w...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

SETI is an ID theory.

no, it's not. it's an observation. it's an observation that a
particular feature of a natural process...the natural process being a
radio wave...has been used by a naturally produced intelligence to
communicate information

That's not all.  SETI is a theory that only intelligent agents can
produce the type of radiosignal in question - not any other source of
radiosignal production.  That's the theoretical part of SETI science.
It isn't just "an observation".  It is in fact a theory of ID - an ID-
only theory to be precise.

SETI does not make DNA. i'm asking you how an intelligence could
create DNA and modify even in our time since we see mutations
happening today.

Do you not know that we are making novel genes with high-level
information? - without the use of random mutation or natural
selection? In fact, such high-level information has never been seen
to be produced by RM/NS. It has only been seen to be produced by ID -
in both DNA and radio signals.

you refuse to answer.

I've told you about such demonstrations several times now. What about
the concept of designer genes don't you understand?

 The proposed mechanism is deliberate design on
at least the human level of creativity and technology.  The very same
thing is true of the type of ID theory I'm proposing.  There is no
essential difference.

wrong. absolutely wrong. the differences are so huge that the analogy
collapses under its own weight
ID is the use of a natural feature of the universe...radio waves...to
communicate information.

Right.  DNA is also a natural feature that is used to communicate
information.

wrong. DNA is chemistry and is being modified today as we speak
through mutations

DNA is a molecule. "Chemistry" is a process of molecular
interactions. While DNA can indeed be modified by random mutations,
random mutations do not produce novel functional beneficial
information within DNA beyond very low levels of functional
complexity. The very same thing is true of radio signals. Non-
deliberate natural processes can produce radio signals in various
forms. These processes can also change or "mutate" in a way that
produces different kinds of radio signals. The only problem here is
that no non-deliberate changes can produce radio signals of certain
types - to include radio signals that carry high-level functional
information.

you are not answering the question.
you rely on a failed analogy because
you have no mechanism. that's not
science

You don't understand the very basic concepts in question here.

< snip repetitive >

 There is no difference here
except in the type of medium used to transmit information.  

wrong. wrong. DNA is chemistry. the mechanisms of changing DNA involve
chemistry. you haven't said a word about the mechanism of changing DNA
that is happening in our world today

Again, scientists are currently manipulating DNA without the need to
use random mutations and natural selection. They intelligently
manipulate DNA far beyond what RM/NS can achieve. That's the very
same concept beyond SETI science. Humans can manipulate radiosignals
to carry high-level information that goes far beyond what any non-
deliberate force of nature can achieve.

radiowaves do not change.

Radio waves can and do change. Change the source of the radio signal
and the signal itself changes. It is just that if the changes are the
result of non-deliberate forces of nature, high-level information is
very unlikely to be produced by such changes.

DNA does. the difference is significant and
fatal to your argument

DNA can and does often change. It is just that if the changes are the
result of a non-deliberate force of nature, high-level information is
very unlikley to be produced by such changes.

The origin
of the information, in each case, is what is in question here.
Certain types of information transmitted by radiowaves is beyond the
powers of non-deliberate nature to produce.  The same thing is true
about certain types of information coded into DNA.

then why not tell us how this happens?
oh. you cant. 'god did it' is the best you can do

Rather, at least human-level intelligence did it. That's the best
SETI or anyone else can do.

creationism is the view that a basic feature of nature...life
itself...is a creation of an intelligence.

Not quite.  My own theory of ID is that a particular feature within
nature, such as certain types of information within DNA, can only be
the result of deliberate intelligent design.  That is the very same
thing SETI scientists are claiming for radiowaves - that specific
types of information within radiowaves can only be the result of ID.

SETI does not apply.

Think again . . .

 Have
you actually seen evolution work beyond the 1000aa threshold?  If not,
upon what do you base your belief that it did work beyond this
threshold via RM/NS?

and how does YOUR mechanism accomplish this?

It happens every day by deliberate design - deliberate human design.
Do you honestly not know that humans do in fact create high-level
genetic information? - as we speak?

< snip repetitive >


that assertion is wrong. protein chemistry is coded for completely by
natural processes. so we KNOW natural processes can create complexity..

Proteins are not produced without pre-existing information already
in the form of specifically ordered DNA molecules

irrelevant. natural processes create complex information

Really? Have any examples of this? This is a key argument. Please
produce an example of non-deliberate natural processes producing high-
level functional information. I'd be most interested.

< snip >

i'm both a ham radio operator and a chemist. yes, seanpit, the
mechanisms of creation of radio waves are completely different than
the laws of chemistry.

I don't believe you are a chemist at all.  If you are a chemist, what
is your real name?  Where do you work?

i told you how to find my information.

Why not use your real name then? - Bob? (Robert J Puharic)? I'm
amazed that you have actually studied chemistry much less biochemistry
at all . . .


DNA can carry information as can radiowaves

and DNA gets modified in real time. radio waves do not.

Radio waves do get modified.

DNA creates proteins. radio waves create nothing.

Where do you think the images on your TV come from?

DNA is a property of life which is a natural process. radio waves are
not

Just because living things use DNA doesn't mean that DNA is the only
think upon which high-level complexity, to the level of "life", could
use. After all, certain computer systems are much more
informationally complex than some of the biosystems we're talking
about here. And, computer information isn't based on DNA. It is
based on electromagnetism (very similar to radio waves by the way -
i.e., electromagnetic radiation).

DNA is based on chemistry. radio waves are not
the differences speak to the fact that you have no mechanism

You're clueless.

what's nonsense is your ridiculous assertion that information
contained in a radio wave is the same as information in life itself.
your argument is like saying that everytime you send a radio signal
you have to invent electromagnetism.

No - you have invented information of a certain type.  Electromagnetic
radiation is simply the medium that transmits the information.  The
medium isn't what is being invented here - it is the information
contained by the medium that is being invented.

life is created by DNA. therefore if DNA is created, so is life.

Not true. Many forms of DNA would not support or produce life. In
other words, not just any arrangement of DNA would produce or support
life. Therefore, only if a certain type of DNA is created, along with
a complex decoding apparatus, would "life" be created. Many forms of
DNA could be created without producing "life" at all.

you seem remarkably dense. i can see why loma linda has an affirmative
action program for 7th day adventists.

You are the one making the hilarious claim that "if DNA is created, so
is life". That's utter nonsense. DNA, by itself, is not "life".
Only someone completely ignorant of biology and biochemistry would
make such a ludicrous claim. It really is so ludicrous that it
deserves a "Chez Wat" nomination

< snip rest >

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Tony Raymonds contra-gap argument
    ... ID is the use of a natural feature of the universe...radio waves...to ... DNA is just as natural as radiowaves. ... information via natural processes. ... i'm both a ham radio operator and a chemist. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Non-God ID origin of Life?
    ... The same can be said for radio signals. ... it is CRITICAL to your argument that we know enough about DNA ... Science only requires ... nature - just like the SETI-type radio signals are not produce by non- ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... Life exists on at least one planet, Earth. ... That life is based on carbon and water. ... Radio waves travel through interplanetary space. ... One could suppose that DNA could have a hidden message. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Chez Wat: Humans cant produce complex DNA?
    ... what is the "mechanism" humans use to produce radio signals ... now tell me how god changes DNA. ... where is the ID mechanism that does this in nature? ... radio waves have no such property at all. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... Life exists on at least one planet, Earth. ... That life is based on carbon and water. ... Radio waves travel through interplanetary space. ... One could suppose that DNA could have a hidden message. ...
    (talk.origins)