“For those who want to explain the origin of life as the result of self–organizing properties intrinsic to the material constituents of living systems, these rather elementary facts of molecular biology have devastating implications. The most logical place to look for self–organizing properties to explain the origin of genetic information is in the constituent parts of the molecules carrying that information. But biochemistry and molecular biology make clear that the forces of attraction between the constituents in DNA, RNA, and protein do not explain the sequence specificity of these large information–bearing biomolecules.”
“Significantly, information theorists insist that there is a good reason for this. If chemical affinities between the constituents in the DNA message text determined the arrangement of the text, such affinities would dramatically diminish the capacity of DNA to carry information. Consider what would happen if the individual nucleotide "letters" in a DNA molecule did interact by chemical necessity with each other. Every time adenine (A) occurred in a growing genetic sequence, it would likely drag thymine (T) along with it. Every time cytosine (C) appeared, guanine (G) would follow. As a result, the DNA message text would be peppered with repeating sequences of A’s followed by T’s and C’s followed by G’s.”
“Rather than having a genetic molecule capable of unlimited novelty, with all the unpredictable and aperiodic sequences that characterize informative texts, we would have a highly repetitive text awash in redundant sequences—much as happens in crystals. Indeed, in a crystal the forces of mutual chemical attraction do completely explain the sequential ordering of the constituent parts, and consequently crystals cannot convey novel information. Sequencing in crystals is repetitive and highly ordered, but not informative. Once one has seen "Na" followed by "Cl" in a crystal of salt, for example, one has seen the extent of the sequencing possible. Bonding affinities, to the extent they exist, mitigate against the maximization of information. They cannot, therefore, be used to explain the origin of information. Affinities create mantras, not messages.”
“…no chemical bonds exist between the nucleotide bases along the message-bearing spine of the DNA helix, demonstrating that physical and chemical forces are not responsible for the specific sequencing in the molecule.”
You haven't posted a reference for this piece of utter nonsense. In fact, there are considerable energetic interactions between DNA nearest neighbors, and differences between the energy, enthalpy, and free energy of an A followed by an A, for example, and a T followed by a T, are very well known. In the terms that should be understandable to the dumbest creationist, DNA bases stack, and the flat edges attract each other by something called a van der Waals interaction. Van der Waals interactions between the bases are bigger between larger bases (A and G) than between smaller bases (C and T.)The thermodynamics were worked out by Breslauer and Markey in the mid 1970s, and can be looked up in any undergraduate textbook of biological thermodynamics. Try Tinoco et al.
Michael Behe, your creationist pal, did quite a bit of research in this area. He should know about this. Or you could even type in numbers ot this neat little online program:
http://corndog.chem.wisc.edu/ming/Programming/method.html
Go on, play with the base sequence. Put in two As, two Gs, two Ts and two Cs, and rearrange the order. See, the order does matter, and what you posted was crap! So what 'great mind' of the creationist movement wrote this nonsense?
This is particularly bad, since you can't claim this is any part of the evolution/creation controversy. Sequence-dependent energetics are simple physical measurements, and don't depend on a particualr theory for an origin of DNA. They've been reproduced over and over again. What a wonderful example of the utter disdain creationists have for any sort of science! Just make up whatever 'facts' are convenient, and count on the fact your creationist audience won't question whatever you say!
If I were you guys, and I thank God I ain't, I'd be insulted!
How do can people look in the mirror after writing such seriously twisted nonsense? And, Heartlander, how can you quote this stuff? (No, I'm not going to cry.)
The chemical bonds called phosphodiester bonds hold the nucleotide bases together along the strand. Hydrogen bonds pair the complementary bases between the DNA strands. Be sure that all reactions involving DNA, including the addition or change of the specific sequence, use normal physical and chemical forces.