thehomer:

Where does the theory talk about natural process in vacuo giving rise to advanced lifeforms?

thehomer: Can you please expatiate?

thehomer: Which particular paper are you referring to? And make sure you've actually read the paper yourself.

thehomer: How do you know that what they're saying is nonsense?

thehomer: What am I supposed to get from the article? And have you read it?
You've also not pointed out the problems that the laws of heredity pose for the natural selection.

Uyi Iredia:

It does that by saying natural selection & random mutation gave rise to the DNA code.

Uyi Iredia:
On what ?

Uyi Iredia:
Any one of them. I've read SOME of the papers myself as well.

Uyi Iredia:
Because codes don't arise naturally. In everyday experience codes are a result of intelligence.

Uyi Iredia:
Read the article.

Deep Sight:

On science, I really don'y know what your qualifications are, but, at the risk of sounding as though I am appealing to authority, Davidylan is a scientific Phd holder.

Just so you know.

Uyi Iredia:

It does that by saying natural selection & random mutation gave rise to the DNA code.




Because codes don't arise naturally. In everyday experience codes are a result of intelligence.

thehomer:

Hey Mr. Deep Sight, can you follow this link to see what your golden boy Ph.D holder is saying?

davidylan:

I guess PhD holders have no right to a religious viewpoint even if it sounds crazy?

Ishilove:
This very correct.

Now my arguing brethren,let’s take a journey deep into the cells of all living organisms. This will be unlike any journey you have ever taken before .
 
Immediately, we see a world of such exquisite detail, design, complexity, inter-dependence and specificity as to boggle the mind. Let’s paint a picture.
 
Amino acids must link together to form a chain, thus making a protein. Notice: “Yet, amino acids form functioning proteins only when they adopt very specific sequential arrangements…like properly sequenced letters in an English sentence. Thus, amino acids alone do not make proteins any more than letters alone make…poetry. In both cases, the sequencing of the constituent parts determines the function [or lack of function] of the whole. Explaining the origin of the specific sequencing of proteins (and DNA) lies at the heart of the current crisis in materialistic evolutionary thinking” (Stephen C. Meyer, DNA And Other Designs, p. 9). (Emphasis mine)

Ishilove:
A brief discussion of proteins and sequencing is necessary. Proteins must appear in exact sequences to cause specific chemical reactions or build specific structures within the cells. This action is called specificity. It is because of specificity that proteins cannot substitute for one another. They are as different in purpose as an axe, a drill, a hammer and a screwdriver.
 
This extensive quote summarizes the enormous difficulty of believing that DNA happened by chance: “The complexity and intricacy of the DNA molecule—combined with the staggering amount of chemically-coded information it contains—speak unerringly to the fact that this ‘supermolecule’ simply could not have happened by blind chance.

Ishilove:
Dr Andrews observed that “It is not possible for a code, of any kind, to arise by chance or accident…A code is the work of an intelligent mind. Even the cleverest dog or chimpanzee could not work out a code of any kind. It is obvious then that chance cannot do it…This could no more have been the work of chance or accident than could the ‘Moonlight Sonata’ be played by mice running up and down the keyboard of my piano,or "Adagio in C minor" by Yanni! (emp added by me ). Codes do not arise from chaos,” (Andrews, E.H.,2008, From Nothing to Nature, pp. 28-29). End quote

Ishilove:
Here is a second statement: “Indeed, codes do not arise from chaos.The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less we can believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially, the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer’ (1982, p. 130, emp.Added). That is the exact point the theist is making: an intelligent Designer is demanded by the evidence” (Bert Thompson, Ph.D., The Case For The Existence of God [Part II]).

Ishilove:
Interesting...
 
Let's go further. Dr. Carl Sagan wrote an article for the Encyclopedia Britannica about DNA. He said, “The information content of a simple cell has been estimated at around (one trillion) bits.” He then went on to explain the enormity of this number by stating, “…that if one were to count every letter of every word of every book in the world’s largest library (over ten million volumes), the final tally would be approximately a trillion letters. Thus, a single cell contains the equivalent information content…of more than ten million volumes” (“Life on Earth,” Vol. 10).
 
In conclusion folks, regarding DNA, we can see that nothing works unless EVERYTHING works at the same time. It could not have gradually come into existence. Special creation, super and DIVINE intelligence is required for DNA to exist!

davidylan:

I guess PhD holders have no right to a religious viewpoint even if it sounds crazy?

thehomer: Why don't you go back and respond to the comments I made on your previous response?



Actually, that is what is being worked on by scientists. This is just a fancy way of saying that non-living things couldn't have arisen by natural processes. That isn't what the theory of evolution addresses. What it addresses is the diversity of life on earth.



Are you talking about DNA or proteins? I ask because there are proteins known as isoenzymes. They actually differ in their sequences yet catalyze the same reactions sometimes at different rates. Their expressions can be affected by the environment.
On nuclear material, you need to realize that there is also RNA which can act both as an enzyme and as genetic material.



This quote is pointless. It simply confuses music for the notes (which are codified) and it confuses a molecule for its representation (which is also codified).



To introduce an intelligent designer you must have some idea about this designer.



The Carl Sagan quote doesn't help you especially when one knows that he wasn't an intelligent design creationist. We already know that the information content in cells when codified is huge.

Ishilove:
The thing is,Mr thehomer I don't have your boundless energy for argument and debate. It wasn't even my intention to post this much but you atheists have a way of ruffling one's feathers with your endless rationalisation(s) that get us nowhere,so I find myself posting even though I know from experience that it is an exercise in futility.

Ishilove:
And as for the music quote,hey it aint my fault you're a philistine. I enjoy arts and music and incorporate it into most things I do.

Ishilove:
Believe it or not but I have a personal relationship with the Intelligent Designer Himself,so Mr Oga,I know what I am talking about,no debte about that. Est-ce que vous comprenez ce que je veux dire?

thehomer:




Here, you seem unable to understand the point of your own post. You presented music as being a code. But you see, music isn't a code, it consists of notes that can be codified using certain rules.

Ishilove:
This very correct.

Now my arguing brethren,let’s take a journey deep into the cells of all living organisms. This will be unlike any journey you have ever taken before .
 
Immediately, we see a world of such exquisite detail, design, complexity, inter-dependence and specificity as to boggle the mind. Let’s paint a picture.
 
Amino acids must link together to form a chain, thus making a protein. Notice: “Yet, amino acids form functioning proteins only when they adopt very specific sequential arrangements…like properly sequenced letters in an English sentence. Thus, amino acids alone do not make proteins any more than letters alone make…poetry. In both cases, the sequencing of the constituent parts determines the function [or lack of function] of the whole. Explaining the origin of the specific sequencing of proteins (and DNA) lies at the heart of the current crisis in materialistic evolutionary thinking” (Stephen C. Meyer, DNA And Other Designs, p. 9). (Emphasis mine)
 
A brief discussion of proteins and sequencing is necessary. Proteins must appear in exact sequences to cause specific chemical reactions or build specific structures within the cells. This action is called specificity. It is because of specificity that proteins cannot substitute for one another. They are as different in purpose as an axe, a drill, a hammer and a screwdriver.
 
This extensive quote summarizes the enormous difficulty of believing that DNA happened by chance: “The complexity and intricacy of the DNA molecule—combined with the staggering amount of chemically-coded information it contains—speak unerringly to the fact that this ‘supermolecule’ simply could not have happened by blind chance.
 
Dr Andrews observed that “It is not possible for a code, of any kind, to arise by chance or accident…A code is the work of an intelligent mind. Even the cleverest dog or chimpanzee could not work out a code of any kind. It is obvious then that chance cannot do it…This could no more have been the work of chance or accident than could the ‘Moonlight Sonata’ be played by mice running up and down the keyboard of my piano,or "Adagio in C minor" by Yanni! (emp added by me ). Codes do not arise from chaos,” (Andrews, E.H.,2008, From Nothing to Nature, pp. 28-29). End quote
 
Here is a second statement: “Indeed, codes do not arise from chaos.The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less we can believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially, the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer’ (1982, p. 130, emp.Added). That is the exact point the theist is making: an intelligent Designer is demanded by the evidence” (Bert Thompson, Ph.D., The Case For The Existence of God [Part II]).

Interesting...
 
Let's go further. Dr. Carl Sagan wrote an article for the Encyclopedia Britannica about DNA. He said, “The information content of a simple cell has been estimated at around (one trillion) bits.” He then went on to explain the enormity of this number by stating, “…that if one were to count every letter of every word of every book in the world’s largest library (over ten million volumes), the final tally would be approximately a trillion letters. Thus, a single cell contains the equivalent information content…of more than ten million volumes” (“Life on Earth,” Vol. 10).
 
In conclusion folks, regarding DNA, we can see that nothing works unless EVERYTHING works at the same time. It could not have gradually come into existence. Special creation, super and DIVINE intelligence is required for DNA to exist!

Ishilove:
Go back and read it again because you misinterpreting it very badly. I am very much aware that music consists of notes,thank you very much. I DID NOT present music as a code, rather,I am trying to highlight the improbability of ANY kind of code (be it DNA etc) occuring by chance as evolution theories try to make us believe,by directly comparing it to a mouse belting out classics from a musical instrument. AN IMPOSSIBILITY.

Ishilove:
Stop twisting my words,you philistine

thehomer:

If you weren't presenting music as a code, then why were you trying to highlight the improbability of any kind of code occurring by chance? Besides, the theory of evolution isn't just governed by chance you know.
Then, are you also saying that mice are unintelligent? Or do you mean that they're not as intelligent as people?



I wasn't twisting your words, I think you need to first try to get a clear idea of what you're trying to say.

Ishilove: Blast it,music isn't the issue here!! I was making use of a literary device called 'simile' when I made the quote. Go figure

thehomer:

I take it that you wish to disregard the previous post. In that case, you have to realize that music or other human creations are not appropriate for you to use in your example.
Secondly, We are discussing scientific issues not literature so you would need to avoid using literary devices and instead clearly state what you're trying to say.

thehomer:

I take it that you wish to disregard the previous post.

justcool: https://www.nairaland.com/371029/evolution-myth-god-question

Ishilove:
Are you a lawyer?? You are so relentless

I am an artist, so I can't help using literary devices when I write.

Ishilove:
This "previous post" you have been hammering on since sef. Please redirect me to it

Ishilove:
Mice are intelligent,but incapable of composing music.
I perfectly understand what I am saying,sir

thehomer:

Do you really want to resurrect that thread?

thehomer:

I meant this one.



Using mice and music as an example is simply terrible if you wish to make an analogy with DNA or codes.

justcool:

LOL. Why not my friend? Are you sceared?

thehomer:

That isn't what the theory of evolution does. I'm tired of repeating to you what it actually does.

thehomer: On your response "they aren't".

thehomer: If you're serious about a discussion, you'll pick the paper that you think best demonstrates what you wish to discuss, read it, post a link to it and tell us what you think it says rather than nebulously pointing at "some papers".

thehomer: You do realize that DNA is a molecule.

thehomer: After you've read it and said what you think it says. I won't waste my time reading an article you've not read yourself.

Uyi Iredia:

I'm also tired of repeating to you that OOL concerns evolution.

Uyi Iredia:
Be more specific.

Uyi Iredia:
I've done that before recall the topic "Descedant Of Apes". The response was still the same as now.

Uyi Iredia:
You do realize this molecule contains a code in the same way your hard drive contains your OS (a code).

Uyi Iredia:
I've read it. I won't post an article I've not read. You read it and stop being lazy.

Ishilove:
 
Yet, as one geologist wrote, “It must be significant that nearly all the evolutionary stories I learned as student…have been debunked” (Dr. DerekV. Ager, Dept. of Geology, Imperial College, London, The Nature of the Fossil Record, Proceedings of the Geological Assoc., Vol. 87, 1976, pp.1132-1133).
 
Perhaps the biggest reason that so many theories within the overall theory of evolution collapse is because they contain terrible logic requiring great leaps in faith to believe. Here is one example of a “debunked” theory: “Many evolutionists have tried to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically to apes and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’sclosest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: ‘Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Cholesterol level tests indicate that the garter snake is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the chicken is man’s closest relative.’  ‘On the basis of another type of blood chemistry test, the butter bean is man’s closest relative’” (Morris, Henry M., The Twilight of Evolution, Grand Rapids: BakerBook House, 1967).

thehomer:

This is obviously an ignorant response.

thehomer: I really don't have time for the useless games you're trying to play. If you're too lazy to scroll back up and follow the thread, then you're probably too lazy to continue discussion.

thehomer: Is that a paper that helps you? If it contains a paper, then how hard is it for you to post a link to it here?

thehomer: The molecule doesn't "contain a code" the molecule can be represented as a code. It is obvious that you're yet to understand that distinction.

thehomer: Sorry but I don't entertain such time wasting and laziness. If you cannot demonstrate that you've read it, why should I waste my time telling you what it says?
You seem too tired or distracted to present a sensible response so I'll let you rest until you actually have something to say.