DNA Translation Has Codes Upon Codes

Creation Evolution Headlines ^ | December 17, 2007

[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...

[aruanan]

Given that DNA is carefully packaged on histones, I bet that they’ll discover a DNA polymerase that reads across adjacent strands of DNA.

[GodGunsGuts]

You deliberately glossed over my main point, which makes you just as dishonest as the other Darwiniacs I encounter on these threads. I thought you were different, Allmendream. But when the science doesn’t square with your FAITH in Darwinism, you resort to half-truths and ad homonym, just like the other Temple of Darwin devotees on FR. Now that you have divulged your true religious colors, I will treat you just like the pond scum your religious beliefs demand you crawled out of. Unlike your proclivity for distraction and deception, I admitted that the language in the Creation Evolution Headlines article needed to be clarified in order to clear up potential confusion (on an extremely minor point). Not only that, every time you have proved me wrong on a particular point, I have publicly admitted my error. Not so with you. Like so many other lazy and dishonest Darwinists, when logic can no longer support the unsupportable, you resort to giving undue emphasis to minor clarification issues, rather than addressing the massive camel that you have long since swallowed on the authority of your pagan religion. In this particular case, your sloven commitment to Darwinism is now available for all to see. For anyone who cares to read your posts carefully, it is clear that your apriori religous commitments prevent you from addressing the central isse: namely, that all three science articles (written by your fellow co-religionists, no less) paint a picture of a DNA code that is “protected by another code, and is read with a machine that reads a third code.” All three Science articles point to this conclusion, and yet you CHOOSE to focus on language inanities that you deliberately pass off as somehow casting doubt on the empirical evidence. You claim to be a scientist. But, as those of us who take the time to pay attention already know, there are scientists, and then there are scientists. You have already admitted that you didn’t have the wherewithall to finish your doctoral degree. And yet you think you can somehow parlay your substandard familiarity with the language of science into casting doubt on your betters. What a laugh!

[Coyoteman]

GodGunsGuts wrote:

as dishonest as the other Darwiniacs
your FAITH in Darwinism,
you resort to half-truths and ad homonym
the other Temple of Darwin devotees
your true religious colors
I will treat you just like the pond scum
your proclivity for distraction and deception
lazy and dishonest Darwinists
the authority of your pagan religion
your sloven commitment to Darwinism
your apriori religous commitments
your fellow co-religionists
You claim to be a scientist
there are scientists, and then there are scientists
you didn’t have the wherewithall to finish your doctoral degree
your substandard familiarity with the language of science

You think you are making any points with that kind of posting?

You're just making yourself look like a true zealot.

[GodGunsGuts]

Coyoteman, you are not a man of your word. You contacted me the other day and asked me to stop pinging you. In case you have forgotten, I replied and said that your request was fine so long as you extended me the same courtesy. But here you are, blindly defending your fellow Darwiniacs, sticking your nose into a scientific controversy you know nothing about. If you are willing to jump into the fray, stand, and be counted, then I am perfectly willing to engage you on the true merits of the HIV-AIDS hypothesis. But what I find particularly loathsome is a coward who avoids danger by taking potshots on the sidelines without any danger of being in the line of fire. Either you are in this fight or you are out. Make up your mind. Until then, stay the hell out of the way.

PS Just in case your religiously motivated selective reading habits caused you to miss it, I was responding to the following "scientific" comments by Allmenlie...err...I mean Allmendream:

“AIDS deniers are a bunch of granola eating coffee enema having, anti-globalization, anti-modern, anti-captialist nut bags who deny Science and think Biologists are part of a worldwide conspiracy to deny truth. I never knew they and Creationists had such a natural overlap in nuttiness. Thanks for exposing this amazing conflation of shoddy thinking.”

Needless to say, Alllyingdreamer missed the fact that Duesberg et al don’t deny AIDS or HIV...they simply posit different cause for the same. Like I said, if you are up to the challenge, then throw down and let the chips fall where they may. Otherwise, put your tail between your legs (as you so often do) and crawl back into the safety of your Coyote den (don't worry, your cubs are probably still to young to pick up on the fact that dear old dad will cut and run at the first opportunity)--GGG

[Coyoteman]

And a very merry Kitzmas to you too.

[GodGunsGuts]

PSS Do you find Allmendream’s comments equally offensive? Or are you like the United Nations, tying the hands of the forces of freedom, while giving a green light to the enemies of the same?

[Coyoteman]

Do you find Allmendream’s comments equally offensive?

Since you asked, it is zealots like you whom I find offensive.

[Grizzled Bear]

Opportunity smiles for FR cartoonists : ancient genes popping out/crawling out of one’s JEANS, coiled around one’s belt, slithering out of pockets, laced above socks... Do we have any cartoonist here with imagination?

---

Wasn’t that a “Marilyn Manson” album cover?

[GodGunsGuts]

That’s what I thought. You know, in the culture of ancient Israel, it was OK to be a coward. It was a fine idea, actually. When the enemy approached the gates, they were to be honest with themselves and stay home with the women and children. The thought was, a coward in battle would do far more damage than if they simply stayed at home. Stay at home, Coyoteman.

[GodGunsGuts]

==Since you asked, it is zealots like you whom I find offensive.

Don’t deceive yourself, Coyoteman. It is the truth that you find offensive. And you are so afraid of it that you are willing to pull down all others who speak the truth just so you don’t have to face it.

[Rb ver. 2.0]

“The DNA code is protected by another code”

The final code will read: “Man is a fool to think he can view the full glory of my majesty while he is alive”—God.

[dan1123]

I might add to your excellent point, allmendream, that this fascinating work would certainly not be nearly so far along but for the fact that the scientists doing it assume evolution to be true.

Thanks for the laugh.

Typically -- whether dealing with DNA, RNA like the polymerases, or proteins like the histones packaging the DNA and influencing it's expression -- the key step in zeroing in for investigation on those sequences likely to functionally important is identifying sequences conserved across evolutionary lineages. Evolution (the assumption of common descent) tells you where to look.

A wide range of philosophical beliefs about the nature of life, biochemistry, or other factors could lead to the same results. Of course, there could be far more important factors in DNA which are overlooked because of this particular philosophy. You defending evolution by arguing from ignorance and speculation is a pretty common practice though.

[GodGunsGuts]

...His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse—Romans 1:20

[RightOnline]

Your post is why I’ve come to FR for nine years. Bravo.

[GodGunsGuts]

==And a very merry Kitzmas to you too.

At least you now admit you worship Darwin’s natural selection god.

[Coyoteman]

And a very merry Kitzmas to you too.

At least you now admit you worship Darwin’s natural selection god.

Kitzmas is the anniversary, December 20, of the Kitzmiller v. Dover decision that sent intelligent design packing, just as an earlier decision by the U.S. Supreme Court sent creation "science" packing back in the 1980s.

[3090VMXA]

I think you will find that Darwinian evolution is mankind's vain attempt at proving his creator does not exist.
I am amazed at all the work being done to create complex organisms and life forms from DNA, etc.
Man can use things that have been created, but he certainly has not created anything. If you wish to create something it would make more sense to start out with something simple like maybe dirt!

[GodGunsGuts]

Like I said, it’s nice to know you finally admit you worship at the alter of Darwin’s natural selection god (celebrations).

[GodGunsGuts]

==I think you will find that Darwinian evolution is mankind’s vain attempt at proving his creator does not exist.

What a frustrating, bruising, and ultimately fruitless effort!

[timer]

Have you got a picture of it?