Posted on 10/06/2016 8:08:19 AM PDT by fishtank
The four dimensional human genome defies naturalistic explanations
by Robert Carter
Published: 6 October 2016 (GMT+10)
Ecoli-bacterium Figure 1: A comparison of the control of transcription in E. Coli (left) with the Linux call graph (right). The bacterial cell is able to control many protein-coding genes (green lines at bottom) with relatively few controls (yellow and purple lines). Linux, while obviously a result of intelligent design, falls far short in that it requires many more high-level instructions to control relatively few outputs. From Yan et al. 2010.1 The human genome is the most complex computer operating system anywhere in the known universe. It controls a super-complex biochemistry that acts with single-molecule precision. It controls the interaction network of hundreds of thousands of proteins. It is a wonderful testament to the creative brilliance of God and an excellent example of the scientific bankruptcy of neo-Darwinian theory. Why? Because the more complex life is, the less tenable evolutionary theory becomes. Super-complex machines cannot be tinkered with haphazardly or they will break. And super-complex machines do not arise from random changes.
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Figure 1: A comparison of the control of transcription in E. Coli (left) with the Linux call graph (right). The bacterial cell is able to control many protein-coding genes (green lines at bottom) with relatively few controls (yellow and purple lines). Linux, while obviously a result of intelligent design, falls far short in that it requires many more high-level instructions to control relatively few outputs. From Yan et al. 2010.1
Related post!
Three-Dimensional DNA Code Defies Evolution
4-27-2015
by Jeffrey Tomkins, Ph.D.
Posted on 4/27/2015, 9:00:46 AM by fishtank
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3283555/posts
It just kind of happened. Because millions of years.
Splice -— soon to come in real life....
There are many things that defy naturalistic explanaition. Such as the existence of a finite nature, the objectivity of moral principles, the objectivity of reason, and the ability of people to experience nature and interact with it including making choices. None of these things we experienced so often we take them for granted can fit in a model that is saddled down with the arbitrary presumption of naturalistic materialism. While some forms of naturalism venture from materialism just far enough to admit the basic facts of these observations as if they were one off exceptions, I must reject them as silly stubbornness. If I just believe in giraffes and somebody showed me a documentary video with giraffes in it it would be very silly of me to just assume that the only part of the giraffes that existed were the outside of the animal facing the camera. Either I should make the case that the giraffes were some kind of computer simulated hoax or accept that they are likely to be full working animals with more to them then I can see.
Yes.
Good explanation!
Emergent complexity is worth studying. Amazing complexity can & does arise from simple rules & processes. Be humble enough to realize that not understanding how it happened doesn’t mean it’s not simple. And realize that intelligent design doesn’t mean it didn’t take a long time to arrive at current states.
BTW, I've proposed a mind experiment, namely, let's take a few laptops along with a few DVDs with OS images and grind them to powder, mix with sea water in a flask, and then bombard the flask with lightening. The question is: how many billions of years before that system evolves back into the original laptop? Will tiny discrete components like resistors, and then transistors first form, and then evolve to primitive integrated circuits, followed by CPU chips and such? And how will the software come into being and evolve? First a simply assignment statement, then a DO loop, then a full blown algorithm that slowly evolves into Windows 7? Quite frankly all of the above has a much greater probability of occurring naturally and much quicker than the evolution of seawater and lightening into human beings because laptops and operating systems are billions of times less complex than human beings.
Check out this related video.
Drew Berry: Animations of unseeable biology
This is a very good representation of some of the machinery in play .... amazing!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFCvkkDSfIU
What is this concept of “lightening” you speak of?
Amen, fishtank. The idea that life sprang from lifeless chemicals is absurd, with all we now know about the stupendous complexity of life. To evolutionists I say, “Prove it.” Throw lifeless chemicals together and make a “simple” single-celled organism. Until then, theirs is just as much a faith-based belief as mine.
Information Theory—part 1: overview of key ideas (article)
Posted on 1/31/2014, 12:00:09 PM by fishtank
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3117912/posts
This was part of a series I posted about Information Thoery.
I would have to re-read the articles to comment about your comment, but I think your thoughts here about random processes are less likely than the author’s thoughts (and mine) about intelligent design of information.
Because the more complex life is, the less tenable evolutionary theory becomes.
...
Actually, evolutionary theory supports the improbability and rarity of life as we know it, I think.
Too bad the ICR is so biased that it’s a bad source of information on the subject.
The article was from CMI, not ICR.
I would confirm my enjoyment of your post but I’d hate to toast any of my future presidential aspirations. :)
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.
