Re: The argument of God from DNA being code

On Jul 30, 7:45 am, Nashton <n...@xxxxx> wrote:
Kermit wrote:
On Jul 30, 6:08 am, Nashton <n...@xxxxx> wrote:
Burkhard wrote:
On 30 July, 09:22, EvoNewbie <warre...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I have heard this argument enough times but because I don't have a
satisfactory knowledge of DNA I don't really have a satisfactory
conclusion. The argument usually follows in the following format that
since code is the type of thing that results from coder and is not
something that can arise any other way. When you see code you can
infer a coder. DNA is code therefore there had to be a coder. I am not
convinced by this argument but I find it hard to dismiss out of hand..
Is the premise correct? Is code the type of thing that necessarily
must have a coder? Could code like the crystalization of water into
snowflakes arrise naturally or through some process that doesn't
require a coder? Is there an example in nature where code arrises
without a coder? Is it acurate to state that DNA is code?
Interesting, but by far not radical enough. "Smoke means fire", so
smoke encodes fire, which means there has to be a coder. Fire thus
proves the existence of the Goddess  Gabija
Another big F A T  non sequitur.

Smoke is the result of fire, which according to specific conditions is
created and henceforth produces smoke.

We can create fire. We can most definitely not produce life from
inanimate matter.

I grew my body and have maintained it so far by ingesting inanimate
matter.

When was the last time you had a nice cold drink of NH3 or a 6 oz. block
of granite?

  What's the difference between a living carbon atom and an

inanimate carbon atom?

What is the difference between a 1 and a 0 and code that produces
fractals resembling leaves on trees?


Yes. Organization and states. Life is the same old matter, but
organized in specific ways, in specific states.

You said we cannot produce life from inanimate matter. I do it all the
time, and so do you. And no, silly, I don't eat granite. If you mean
can we take boxes of raw elements and assemble them into living
things, no, we can't do that yet. We can't build volcanoes yet,
either. What's yer point?

What will it prove when we can - will you announce your atheism and
start learning science?



Burkhard is wrong; fire is clearly code for producing smoke. Smoke is
the evidence for the fire code.
Smoke exists,
and fire codes for smoke,
and code requires a mind,
therefore
Gabija

Or similarly:
Life exists,
and DNA codes for life,
and code requires a mind,
therefore
Jesus

Nonsense.

Matter exists
fire exists
goo
you
big bang
therefore Timedonit.

A textbook or two on cosmology, Earth science, and evolutionary
biology would flesh out that argument rather well. What evidence do
you have to give yours substance? If you want details, we have
hypotheses and theories covering the Big Bang, the formation of the
planets, abiogenesis, evolution, etc. Where are the details of your
"God did it, but not by natural processes" claims, and what evidence
do you have to support them?

Were I a theist, I would think an omnipotent creator could do it any
darn way he pleased, and wonder why folks like you constantly assert
that he lied, and all the accumulated evidence which points to one
picture is just a joke, or some sort of test. Will I get thrown in
hell if I believe in the reliability of verifiable data rather than
your wishful thinking?




Kermit
Kermit

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The argument of God from DNA being code
    ... since code is the type of thing that results from coder and is not ... DNA is code therefore there had to be a coder. ... smoke encodes fire, which means there has to be a coder. ... Smoke is the result of fire, which according to specific conditions is ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The argument of God from DNA being code
    ... since code is the type of thing that results from coder and is not ... DNA is code therefore there had to be a coder. ... smoke encodes fire, which means there has to be a coder. ... Smoke is the result of fire, which according to specific conditions is ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The argument of God from DNA being code
    ... since code is the type of thing that results from coder and is not ... DNA is code therefore there had to be a coder. ... smoke encodes fire, which means there has to be a coder. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The argument of God from DNA being code
    ... since code is the type of thing that results from coder and is not ... DNA is code therefore there had to be a coder. ... smoke encodes fire, which means there has to be a coder. ... Smoke is the result of fire, which according to specific conditions is ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: The argument of God from DNA being code
    ... since code is the type of thing that results from coder and is not ... DNA is code therefore there had to be a coder. ... Any heterogeneous polymer can carry a code. ... would you design the current one? ...
    (talk.origins)