Posted on 01/13/2009 6:40:50 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
The traditional understanding of DNA has recently been transformed beyond recognition. DNA does not, as we thought, carry a linear, one-dimensional, one-way, sequential code—like the lines of letters and words on this page. And the 97% in humans that does not carry protein-coding genes is not, as many people thought, fossilized ‘junk’ left over from our evolutionary ancestors. DNA information is overlapping-multi-layered and multi-dimensional; it reads both backwards and forwards; and the ‘junk’ is far more functional than the protein code, so there is no fossilized history of evolution. No human engineer has ever even imagined, let alone designed an information storage device anything like it. Moreover, the vast majority of its content is metainformation—information about how to use information. Meta-information cannot arise by chance because it only makes sense in context of the information it relates to. Finally, 95% of its functional information shows no sign of having been naturally selected; on the contrary, it is rapidly degenerating! That means Darwin was wrong—natural selection of natural variation does not explain the variety of life on Earth. The best explanation is what the Bible tells us: we were created—as evidenced by the marvels of DNA—but then we fell and now endure the curse of ‘bondage to decay’ by mutations...
(Excerpt) Read more at creationontheweb.com ...
If we can study, scientifically, the creation event, is it possible that we can scientifically study the resurrection?
But my quote from the article specifically mentions the Bible and the Fall of Man, which comes from the Bible:
The best explanation is what the Bible tells us: we were created—as evidenced by the marvels of DNA—but then we fell and now endure the curse of ‘bondage to decay’ by mutationsLike I said, the Bible doesn't mention DNA or mutations and you agree.
Very factual, and fitting, but its going to hurt a lot of feelings.
You are quite correct, the Bible doesn’t mention mutation or DNA. But creation science predicts the creation of life at the apex of functional complexity, and then steady degeneration after the fall. Thus, any aspect of life that science discovers, creation science predicts it will be degenerating, to include DNA. Science has merely found one of the mechanisms by which this is being brought about. As such, creation science predicts devolution, not evolution. And judging by the available evidence, it would seem that nature is intent on bringing this prediction to fruition.
All the best—GGG
PS Did you read the paper this post links to with respect to supposed “junk” DNA? It would seem that this neo-Darwinist prediction is on the verge of extinction.
read later
Thanks for the ping!
>moonbats
I don’t appreciate that.
Not in scientific language, but in literary form it definitely mentions that entropy is the way of nature.
"Nature will wax old, as a garment."
We see only those where there's a nice match of meta-information that complements the other code, just like we see only those with a correct key.
Incorrect meta-information would not survive.
How about sharing some of the examples that spring to your mind?
If actual examples are too tough, how about sharing some conceivable examples?
We’re talking about science in THIS country Coyoteman, where Catholics are in the MINORITY, not that this is remotely relevant, as the very best argument you can make by dragging the Pope into the science class, (btw, hypocritically doing exactly what you always whine about others doing) is that evolution IS intelligent design!
But then, as everyone knows, logic simply isn’t your strong suit!
Problem is there’s only one God and Satan will do all he can to trick you into believing he has a good key too.
He doesn’t.
What you are doing is promoting a very narrow fundamentalist view of religion and creation, one shared by only a small percentage of Christians. And you are saying that the majority Christian view, which holds that science must be accorded its appropriate respect, is heresy or blasphemy or some such.
The Pope and a large majority of Catholics would most likely say you are totally wrong. And last I looked, Catholics are the single largest religious denomination on earth. Are you saying that both scientists and Catholics are all wrong?
And from your response to my post you have shown that this thread properly should have been posted in the Religion Forum. You are not doing science.
You seriously don’t get tired of hearing yourself lie, day in and day out do you Coyoteman?
WHEN will you understand liberals will not be allowed to undermine FR like they undermine science and virtually anything and everything else they touch?
***********************************************************
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006/03/americans_overwhelmingly_suppo.html
Headline: “Americans Overwhelmingly Support Teaching Scientific Challenges to Darwinian Evolution, Zogby Poll Shows” From March 2006.
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=719
**********************************************************
Free Republic Poll on Evolution
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1706571/posts?page=63#63
**********************************************************
Creationism makes a comeback in US
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1856224/posts
***********************************************************
Teaching creation and evolution in schools
Solid research reveals American beliefs
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i2/teaching.asp
************************************************************
Survey Finds Support Is Strong For Teaching 2 Origin Theories
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B07E4D9143BF932A25750C0A9669C8B63
************************************************************
Public Divided on Origins of Life
http://people-press.org/report/254/religion-a-strength-and-weakness-for-both-parties
************************************************************
Americans Believe in Jesus, Poll Says (creation poll results included)
http://derekgulbranson.com/2005/01/17/americans-believe-in-jesus/
I’m not saying my view should be the only one considered. Where did you get that from?
It all goes back to that idea of no moral compass.
LOL...
Read the thread.
How about a short synopsis of the development of your worldview?
Given your medical background, you needn't reiterate your considerable education, but what prompted you to study medicine in the first place?
Did your mother beat you often?
Did a minister attempt to view your privates?
What made you into a godless atheist?
Care to give an example where DNA’s function is not associated with protein production?
What “function” have short terminal repeats, ERV’s, and pseudogenes been found to have; besides the few that are associated with transciption of DNA into RNA and then translation into protein?
Speaking of St. Thomas Aquinas...
“The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Christian, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.”
Saint Thomas Aquinas
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.