Posted on 12/18/2007 11:11:23 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
The DNA code is protected by another code, and is read with a machine that reads a third code. This is an emerging picture from ongoing research into DNA translation, as reported in Science...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationsafaris.com ...
==Happy Holidays Everyone! Have a Merry Christmas, a cool Yule, and a Happy New Year!
Finally, we can both agree!
A Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you and yours—GGG
==No, I meant LDS. It is a movie reference. If you weren’t such a humorless ass, or were more rounded in your education, you would have realized it was not a typo...And the reference in the movie was to Berkeley as well.
Wow, Wiley finally displays some spunk! Bravo! For a while there I thought maybe you were a dead man walking. Darwinist materialism will do that to you, don’t ya know.
Seeing how you both claim to be scientists, if I could get a Creation Scientist to come on and debate either one of you as to whether pseudogenes are evidence of common descent, would either of you be game?
I’m not either of the people you are challenging to a debate, but I can assure you that any website that cannot restrict the debate to the participants is not a suitable host.
And any participant who can’t respond at least several times a day is not worth considering.
Don’t get ahead of yourself. I don’t even have anyone specific lined up yet. I just want to know if Allmendream or Ichy is up to the challenge if I can find a Creation Scientist to come on and debate. And besides, it should be easy enough to set up a parallel thread (as before) for spectator comments. And then at the end of the debate, the scientists from both sides could field questions for a set amount time, and then, if we wish, we spectators can debate the aftermath until the cows come home.
GGG is glycine.
What does Duesberg say of evolution?
Yeah. A little humility is in order when studying something created "in the image of God."
A good friend of mine started off Ph.D graduate school as an Atheist and is now a Theist. He had a nervous breakdown of some sort in school and now claimes to have found God.
But its mostly junk; doesn't mean anything you know! (except for the vastly interlinked checksums that were put there to prevent the kind of disaster that real life evolution would present...)
He says what he has to say to keep the money flowing, just like every other dweller of the 'Grant Farm.'
Its amazing what sandcastles can be built on a simple, but erroneous assumption. The assumption that mutation can result in useful, life prolonging increases in information has never been demonstrated to be true; it is simply assumed to be so when a change is observed. A far more likely cause of change is the preprogrammed adaptability that our creator has provided for his creation.
It can and it has been and it can be easily be replicated. The AIDS virus does this in a fraction of the span of one human lifetime.
IF Darwin’s natural selection god were real, then everyone should AFTER ALL THESE PURPORTED EONS be uniformly supermen and women. Since they obviously aren’t, natural selection has done a crappy job as I am feeling physically and emotionally like one of NATURAL SELECTION’S biggest flops.
. . or . . I look in the mirror and see either an aging human being affected by . . could it be? . . SIN (not God’s fault) . . or else the result of a natural selection that obviously can’t seem to get it right after eons of chances. . and I’ve seen worse examples than myself of human weakness in this mortal coil.
So . . I look for the Kingdom of the Creator to fix it all as natural selection has apparently had its crack at it.
Take your ignorant nonsense to the church of evolutionism.
No mutation has ever been proven to result in an increase of info. Assumption isn’t going to get it here.
Without getting into the details of information theory, there are two possible and easily understandable ways of defining information quantity.
One way is by the length of the genome, which changes in both directions as a result of mutation, and sometimes as a result of viral insertion.
Another way of looking at information is by looking at the affect changes have on viability and reproductive success. In this case it is also possible to demonstrate positive changes, in repeatable laboratory conditions.
Can you say the same for your coffee enemas?
See, you're pushing assumption, rather than fact. You are crediting mutation for a result far more likely, of preprogrammed adaptation.
As long as the program is designed to try every possible change to a gene, as has been observed under laboratory conditions, I'll go along.
The real point is that our creator prepared all of his creation to serve his plan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.