That's my point entirely, thanks. DNA programming is superior to Man's current level of computer programming.
That's my point entirely, thanks. DNA programming is superior to Man's current level of computer programming.
Computer codes, languages, and hardware have evolved whether you want to admit it or not. Selection is the primary feature of that evolutionary change. Whether a single intelligent entity is making the choice from among a limited subset of options or the choices are made by corporations seeking to maximize profit they are still choices that depend on stochastic factors. The intelligent control you speak of is relatively unimportant save as a source of innovation and even then many important discoveries are accidental.
I am not sure what you intend to mean when you refer to Evolution Theory. Clearly the theory must accommodate all known information, generate predictions, and survive hypothesis testing. The evolution of life on this planet is a fact. The theory offers an explanation for the fact. Currently natural selection comprises the foundation of that explanation.
" It doesn't matter that you can give a name to any sequence of codons but can not do the same for any sequence of binary data/code. Just because you know the name of a sequence of three codons doesn't even mean that you can know from a random string of codons whether three in that series serve to code part of a gene for a finger or a toe (but hey, you can give 'em a name - chuckle)." -- Southack
I realize that oversimplification is a risk in these discussion because those that argue for Intelligent Design generally do not understand basic biology let alone the state of the art in molecular biology. Nonetheless, the sequence of DNA gives precisely the sequence of amino acids or the primary structure of the peptide if the initiation point is known. Practically every functional gene in some laboratory organisms have been completely sequenced and the functions of the resulting proteins described. Genes that influence the development of fingers and toes (your example) are also known. You might well be surprised at the number of human (and perforce Chimpanzee) genes for which effects are known. Same sequences often do the same things in diverse species so when you know the sequence from one and you find it in another you can verify its function quickly.
"Clearly both human programs as well as human life can be usefully modified by an intelligent intervention. Yet no one can cite a single unaided, non-intelligent example of either..." -- Southack
There are plenty of examples of evolutionary change in the history of human life. Bipedalism, cranial capacity, opposable thumbs, Vitamin C dependency, neoteny, dentition, sickle cell anemia, disease resistance and on and on. Computer codes are human inventions and that is all they are so it would be futile to look for one that wasn't.
"That's my point entirely, thanks. DNA programming is superior to Man's current level of computer programming." -- Southack
There is no DNA programming except by natural processes. Life descends from life in a continuum with modification. Population gene frequencies change over time. Chromosome structures and numbers change over time. DNA is not fixed and the record of life provides a timeline for the emergence of every new form. At what point does the imaginary Designer involve himself? If at the beginning then his work was too simple to have required design because self assembly is a known characteristic of all the biological polymers. If he intervenes at odd moments now and then he would have nothing to do because the known rates of natural change would already have done his job for him. If he intervenes continuously then he is indistinguishable from the natural processes we already understand. In other words, everyone knows how a computer programmer does his job. There is no clue as to how the Demiurge is supposed to have done his DNA "programming" and there clearly never will be.
"The supreme question for this thread is really whether DNA can self-form naturally, in an unaided, unintelligent, primal, "random" environment." -- Southack to Tortoise
Of course it can. For DNA or RNA The sequence of bases may not even be random in some environments. Proteinoid microspheres, for example also form naturally from as few as two different amino acids. These membranous spheroid surfaces have enzymatic properties and serve to sequester and align molecular species for interaction. Crystallization also occurs abiotically. The formation of DNA naturally is not an obstacle to the origin of life.
More importantly for this discussion is what happens to the DNA in living organisms. How does it change and how is it transmitted from generation to generation. In order for your Intelligent Designer to be of any use he would have to actually control all the mutations occurring naturally in every invdividual of every breeding population. He would also have to decide which individuals die without reproducing and who mates with whom where sexual reproduction occurs. He is superfluous.
From the moment of the Big Bang, this process, loaded with infinitely precise information, has guided all life, without His actually having to reach into our world and physically manipulate things, one way or the other.
Notice how genetic researchers are discovering that DNA clones, still do not perform as they had hoped, and their attempt to do God's work only exposes man's continuing imperfection. There's always a factor that still eludes us, and so it should be.