Basically DNA is a set of very advanced programmed instructions in our cells that defines who we are. This set of instructions is similar in structure to most computer programmes though much less sofisticated. We all know it takes a great deal of sofisticated technology to write computer programmes and this relatively simple programmes requires a programmer how much less the DNA programm which is far molre advanced and complicated.

"At that moment, when the DNA/RNA system became understood, the debate between Evolutionists and Creationists should have come to a screeching halt",  I.L. Cohen, Researcher and Mathematician; Member NY Academy of Sciences; Officer of the Archaeological Inst. of America; "Darwin Was Wrong - A Study in Probabilities"; New Research Publications, 1984, p. 4

DNA is a Language, Complete with an Alphabet!

"This development is highly significant for the modern origin of life discussion. Molecular biology has now uncovered an analogy between DNA and written human languages. It is more than an analogy, in fact: in terms of structure, the two are "mathematically identical." (In other words, its not analogous to a language--it is a language).

In the case of written messages, we have uniform experience that they have an intelligent cause. What is uniform experience? It simply means that people everywhere observe a certain type of event always in association with a certain type of cause.

When we find evidence that a similar event happened in the past, it is reasonable to infer it had a similar cause. As I shall argue, based on uniform experience there is good reason to accept an intelligent cause for the origin of life as well."


CONCLUSION

There is a language, a language similar to human languages, which is embedded in every living thing, and it gives very intricate instructions to the cell concerning, reproduction, cell growth, formation, the exact timing of these processes and everything else concerning the cell.


It is proof that someone with infinitely higher technical ability than ourselves, is responsible for implanting a DNA message into the cell of everything alive in the universe which says "Hello, I am your Creator".

Source: http://www.s8int.com/dna1.html

@ poster, why then did science take up the challenge to discover it? it more or less backs up the core of evolution. it proves the ability and form with which creatures can transfer advantageous traits to the next generation and with time make a big difference. Stick to the 6 day creation story.

Even at 12 years of age, I thought something was not right with the "let there be light and there was light" story. My mom always told me I asked too many questions. My inquisitive mind must have been activated at 8 when I lost my dad.  My poor mom had to deal with my constant questions - When will dad return? Who made God? What was there before God? What was it like before anything was created? I was warned I would go crazy if I continued to ask these questions.

I wonder why this creator will not modify this DNA code to fix the evil in the world. Programmers usually can fix bugs in their codes by re-writing them. Why does he/she allow free will to rule?

Kay 17:

@ poster, why then did science take up the challenge to discover it?

Do u know the meaning of science at all?. Human inquisition is best explained as science.
So if by human knowledge we understand the intricate programming involved in human cells. . . . . .how do we explain their diversity, authenticity and originality?
Does it not require a more intelligent being to write such?. . .

Kay 17:

it more or less backs up the core of evolution. it proves the ability and form with which creatures can transfer advantageous traits to the next generation and with time make a big difference. Stick to the 6 day creation story.

There is nothing in the O or about DNA that generally supports evolution. . .for crying out loud.
how do u ascertain that creatures transfer advantageous traits to next generations using DNA? . . . . is it a coincidence that no two persons DNA are the same?

intelligence might be expensive. . . . .but try knowledge.

isorry4u:

Even at 12 years of age, I thought something was not right with the "let there be light and there was light" story. My mom always told me I asked too many questions. My inquisitive mind must have been activated at 8 when I lost my dad.  My poor mom had to deal with my constant questions - When will dad return? Who made God? What was there before God? What was it like before anything was created? I was warned I would go crazy if I continued to ask these questions.

So because ur daddy died. . . .u stopped believing in God
u are not alone so was banom. . .so is mazaje, toneyb, huxley and tudor.

I wonder why this creator will not modify this DNA code to fix the evil in the world. Programmers usually can fix bugs in their codes by re-writing them. Why does he/she allow free will to rule?

The same reason why the creator did not use the DNA to prevent u from coming online, logging into nairaland and making the above post.

Scratch that. . . If we were so intelligently designed, why are there errors in transcription and replication of DNA which often lead to genetic disorders.

@Noetic.
When did you kill my daddy?

^^^noetic, you anticipated me. Questions to ask people like Kay 17, for it seems that people just like to open their mouths and spew whatever comes to their minds. Ha.
__________________

@Kay 17, you don't make any sense. .  and you can stick to your cacophony and stop pretending you understrand a dot about science.

Kay 17:

@ poster, why then did science take up the challenge to discover it? it more or less backs up the core of evolution.

What exactly is the 'core' of evolution that it backs up? How does your 'core' reason out how DNA came to be what it is in the first place?

Tudór:

Scratch that. . . If we were so intelligently designed, why are there errors in transcription and replication of DNA which often lead to genetic disorders.

Are you by rote asserting that we are the result of an accident?

isorry4u:

I wonder why this creator will not modify this DNA code to fix the evil in the world. Programmers usually can fix bugs in their codes by re-writing them. Why does he/she allow free will to rule?

Please tell me how DNA is supposed to 'fix' evil in the world.

then God shuld be responsible for the evils of man since man would be subject to the programming and would be unable to act beyond what he was instructed to do. (i am not conceding to theists), just saying this contradicts the bible.

Kay 17:

then God shuld be responsible for the evils of man since man would be subject to the programming and would be unable to act beyond what he was instructed to do. (i am not conceding to theists), just saying this contradicts the bible.

Please answer the damn questions and stop making stupid excuses! When folks like you come to the end of yourselves, you want to blame your void of thought and reason on 'God'. What exactly is the 'core' of evolution that it backs up? How does your 'core' reason out how DNA came to be what it is in the first place?

viaro:

Are you by rote asserting that we are the result of an accident?

I asked a simple question and you're going on about what I might be asserting. How is that releavant?

Tudór:

I asked a simple question and you're going on about what I might be asserting. How is that releavant?

If someone is not going to risk an answer out of context to your enquiry, would it not be appropriate to ask about what you implied by your initial assumption?

The DNA technology proves the existence of a creator of a creation(the universe and all that is therein), and i do not see any big deal about that.But it neither proves the identity of that creator to fit any religious fantasy nor disproves evolution.
You guys are really getting boring now.

viaro:

If someone is not going to risk an answer out of context to your enquiry, would it not be appropriate to ask about what you implied by your initial assumption?

Again, WHAT ASSUMPTION?

I asked a simple open and honest question. . .is that a problem?

Anybody to explain why we have so many errors and mistakes in the so-called intellgently designed DNA?

Tudór:

Again, WHAT ASSUMPTION?

The first part of your question: "If we were so intelligently designed," - what does that imply? If it implies nothing at all, the question was unnecessary, and does not need anyone to even give it a glance.

I asked a simple open and honest question. . .is that a problem?

Don't be perturbed - as you can see, no one has stated that your asking a question was a problem. Was it any problem to you that anyone should ask what you implied by your question?

jagunlabi:

The DNA technology proves the existence of a creator of a creation(the universe and all that is therein),

How?

Personally, I do not think that DNA "proves" anything about a Creator, just like Mathematics or English do not 'prove' that Creator. Perhaps the best anyone might say is that such things are tools that help us to understand the intricacies of our own existence.

Which of the gods?

viaro:

How?

If there is a creation, there has to be a creator of it.Simple.Why complicate issues that are so simple?To win debates?That is silly.

viaro:

The first part of your question: "If we were so intelligently designed," - what does that imply? If it implies nothing at all, the question was unnecessary, and does not need anyone to even give it a glance.

Somehow in grandmaster viaro's planet, one can't ask an honest question question without implying something. Thank goodness I was born on earth.

Don't be perturbed - as you can see, no one has stated that your asking a question was a problem. Was it any problem to you that anyone should ask what you implied by your question?

question was simple, answer it if you can. If you can't then move over and let others who wouldn't come bore me to death with phantom assumptions tackle the question.

Last time I checked, it wasn't by force to respond to every post.

jagunlabi:

If there is a creation, there has to be a creator of it.Simple.Why complicate issues that are so simple?To win debates?That is silly.

Lol, it is actually silly to assume anyone here is trying to win any debate. Tell us what we don't already know, and not the silly quips you make so assertively. Your reply looks like one of 'em sayings about 'a painting points to a painter', etc. Has it ever occured to you that there are pictures without anyone having painted them?

Sorry pal, DNA is no "proof" of a Creator - not that viaro does not believe in Him: yes, I most certain do. But using all these quips as "proof" of a Creator is child's babble.

Tudór:

Somehow in grandmaster viaro's planet, one can't ask an honest question question without implying something. Thank goodness I was born on earth.question was simple, answer it if you can. If you can't then move over and let others who wouldn't come bore me to death with phantom assumptions tackle the question.

Last time I checked, it wasn't by force to respond to every post.

O c'mon chap! Did viaro ever say that one can't ask a question, let alone an honest question? If you didn't imply anything, your question was irrelevant - and yea, you're right: no one is required to answer questions like yours if you're dancing around unable to state quite simply what you might imply. Just let it rest.

viaro:

O c'mon chap! Did viaro ever say that one can't ask a question, let alone an honest question? If you didn't imply anything, your question was irrelevant - and yea, you're right: no one is required to answer questions like yours if you're dancing around unable to state quite simply what you might imply. Just let it rest.

Next please!!

Anyone with an idea should please intimate us.

viaro:

Please answer the damn questions and stop making silly  excuses! When folks like you come to the end of yourselves, you want to blame your void of thought and reason on 'God'. What exactly is the 'core' of evolution that it backs up? How does your 'core' reason out how DNA came to be what it is in the first place?

dna carry the information or genes that is necessary for an organism to function and develop. therefore, to decipher it would take deeper in understanding evolution and even how to replicate it.

noetic15:

Do u know the meaning of science at all?. Human inquisition is best explained as science.
So if by human knowledge we understand the intricate programming involved in human cells. . . . . .how do we explain their diversity, authenticity and originality?
Does it not require a more intelligent being to write such?. . .

There is nothing in the O or about DNA that generally supports evolution. . .for crying out loud.
how do u ascertain that creatures transfer advantageous traits to next generations using DNA? . . . . is it a coincidence that no two persons DNA are the same?

intelligence might be expensive. . . . .but try knowledge.

you are right in the definition but, science with time and the direct opposition it has received from religion has been formed into an institution which is founded on truth against religion founded on belief.  Galileo can testify to that, and today it faces the same blind opposition from religion on matters like stem cell and evolution. at the end of the day, they seek to share the fruits yielded by science.

Kay 17:

dna carry the information or genes that is necessary for an organism to function and develop. therefore, to decipher it would take deeper in understanding evolution and even how to replicate it.

Thank you, Kay 17 for attempting an answer. I'm only afraid you didn't answer the questions - not at all. Aside the tale you're telling, please try another look at the questions and see if you have this 'core' thingy for your claim:

What exactly is the 'core' of evolution that it backs up?

How does your 'core' reason out how DNA came to be what it is in the first place?

Your response was that 'dna carry the information or genes that is necessary for an organism to function and develop' - yes, but was anyone saying that DNA do not carry such things? Was that the question I asked? You can see it's not.

viaro:

Lol, it is actually silly to assume anyone here is trying to win any debate.

No, it is not silly.That is what you guys try to do every time and all the time, win debates.

viaro:

Your reply looks like one of 'em sayings about 'a painting points to a painter', etc. Has it ever occured to you that there are pictures without anyone having painted them?

Point me to one.Point me to a painting that was not painted by no painter.Point me to an automobile that was not built by an automobilemaker.Just because you cannot identify the painter of a painting does not mean that the painting never had a painter.
If you want to argue down a religious person, then you'd have a better chance disproving the identity of the creator claimed by the religious person.That makes more sense.

viaro:

Sorry pal, DNA is no "proof" of a Creator - not that viaro does not believe in Him: yes, I most certain do. But using all these quips as "proof" of a Creator is child's babble.

I say it does prove a creator and if you disagree, then prove to me how it doesn't.
Moreover, i don't care what you believe in and what gender you give the creator, afterall it is not that important since this is not about proving the ID of the creator, but just the existence there of.

viaro:

Thank you, Kay 17 for attempting an answer. I'm only afraid you didn't answer the questions - not at all. Aside the tale you're telling, please try another look at the questions and see if you have this 'core' thingy for your claim:

What exactly is the 'core' of evolution that it backs up?

How does your 'core' reason out how DNA came to be what it is in the first place?

Your response was that 'dna carry the information or genes that is necessary for an organism to function and develop' - yes, but was anyone saying that DNA do not carry such things? Was that the question I asked? You can see it's not.

aren't you aware of the theory of evolution. the process of survival and reproduction and transfer of a desirable trait to the next generation. dna holds the genes. don't you see the connection.

yes, a car has a maker and a purpose, a painting has a painter and has a purpose. but why did God create a toad?

Tudór:

Scratch that. . . If we were so intelligently designed, why are there errors in transcription and replication of DNA which often lead to genetic disorders.

hear urself.

Does the nature of DNA allow for transcription and replication? replication is a man-made concept, its failure is as a result of man limited knowledge.
The design process of DNA suggests a super-designer, who was intelligent enough to make each DNA unique. . .this is not rocket science. . or is it?

@Noetic.
When did you kill my daddy?

I tot oyedepo killed him with tithes and offering demands

Kay 17:

   dna carry the information or genes that is necessary for an organism to function and develop. therefore, to decipher it would take deeper in understanding evolution and even how to replicate it.

I still dont see the connection between DNA and evolution. if DNA's are identical then it will probably explain specie diversification as claimed by evolution. . .otherwise ur argument does not add up

you are right in the definition but, science with time and the direct opposition it has received from religion has been formed into an institution which is founded on truth against religion founded on belief.  Galileo can testify to that, and today it faces the same blind opposition from religion on matters like stem cell and evolution. at the end of the day, they seek to share the fruits yielded by science.

Your assertions are very FALSE. science is NOT a religion neither is it an alternative to religion. science and xtinaity are NOT mutually exclusive
There is nothing scientific that has been opposed by Christianity. . . . . . , for a start,evolution aint even science. Evolution is a FAITH concept, so also is atheism and other dogmatic claims that are ignorantly hidden under the banner of science.

True science is not at war with xtian beliefs.

noetic15:

hear urself.

Does the nature of DNA allow for transcription and replication? replication is a man-made concept, its failure is as a result of man limited knowledge.
The design process of DNA suggests a super-designer, who was intelligent enough to make each DNA unique. . .this is not rocket science. . or is it? 

Em, replication, transcription and translocation all occur naturally. Its by these mechanisms cells multiply and proteins are formed.

I tot oyedepo killed him with tithes and offering demands 

bad bele people no go eva succeed!