[Havoc]

No, it's not--"the rest" was there first. Both in an origins sense, and a birthing sense. The executable is the chemical feedback loops--the things that can execute on their own. The DNA is the passive data--some (much) of which will never execute until or unless called up by a chemical deficiency.

Ok, I think we're on the same page. You seem to think I'm making a point of where any of this comes in as far as timeing, I'm not. As you said, the DNA is passive data. But it holds the coding. I may have oversimplified my example for your purposes; but, then my example to many here may end up with people scratching their heads goin "splain that". LOL. What I'm saying with regard to DNA is that the data from which you get your boundaries is there. Not that it is running the show as in being the working program. My underlying point is that the program calls upon the dna for it's boundaries and the rest is used as input for the program.

In other words, the rest would constitute what you are typing. For the purpose of example, I'm just assuming all the parts are present - not when they arrive. The application is running, grabs the DNA and loads its headers. The input information is fed in telling what functionality needs to be called up - grabs it from the library/data file (dna) in memory, then spits out the final product to go on it's merry way. The DNA is a store of information defining what this can be and what it is.

As to my statement regarding compatibility, the only point being made is that the human and animal reproductive systems are incompatible for the information. You can't combine dna from a man and from an animal through natural reproductive processes because the two have seperate encoded limits within themselves that refuse to let the executable process them together as it were. The datasets do not match. And thank God they don't or there'd be some European sheep farmers with a lot of explaining to do. lol.

Anyway, hate to cut this short.. gotta run to a family get together here. May be back on later.

[donh]

You can't combine dna from a man and from an animal through natural reproductive processes because the two have seperate encoded limits within themselves that refuse to let the executable process them together as it were. The datasets do not match. And thank God they don't or there'd be some European sheep farmers with a lot of explaining to do. lol.

Ah...but they do match, at the machinery level, where the ribosomes grind out the proteins. You are artificially limiting what you mean by reproduction. Bacteria diddle selectively with each other's DNA, which transmits partial DNA changes, but is not itself mitosis, producing new animals. Similarly, perhaps, Pig, chicken, man, and flu virus might constitute an evolutionary system in the making, rather analogous to the system that changed unicellulars into multi-cellulars, nerveless jellyfish into chordata, or solitary ants, who breed for themselves, into social ants that let the queen breed for them.