Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sentis
I did a quick Google search and found this article that may or may not help enhance your understanding of what DNA is doing...

DNA Double Helix: A Recent Discovery of Enormous Complexity
The DNA Double Helix is one of the greatest scientific discoveries of all time. First described by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953, DNA is the famous molecule of genetics that establishes each organism's physical characteristics. It wasn't until mid-2001, that the Human Genome Project and Celera Genomics jointly presented the true nature and complexity of the digital code inherent in DNA. We now understand that there are approximately 35,000 genes in each human DNA molecule, comprised of approximately 3 billion chemical bases arranged in precise sequence. Even the DNA molecule for the single-celled bacterium, E. coli, contains enough information to fill all the books in any of the world's largest libraries.

DNA Double Helix: The "Basics"
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is a double-stranded molecule that is twisted into a helix like a spiral staircase. Each strand is comprised of a sugar-phosphate backbone and numerous base chemicals attached in pairs. The four bases that make up the stairs in the spiraling staircase are adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C) and guanine (G). These stairs act as the "letters" in the genetic alphabet, combining into complex sequences to form the words, sentences and paragraphs that act as instructions to guide the formation and functioning of the host cell. Maybe even more appropriately, the A, T, C and G in the genetic code of the DNA molecule can be compared to the "0" and "1" in the binary code of computer software. Like software to a computer, the DNA code is a genetic language that communicates information to the organic cell.

The DNA code, like a floppy disk of binary code, is quite simple in its basic paired structure. However, it's the sequencing and functioning of that code that's enormously complex. Through recent technologies like x-ray crystallography, we now know that the cell is not a "blob of protoplasm", but rather a microscopic marvel that is more complex than the space shuttle. The cell is very complicated, using vast numbers of phenomenally precise DNA instructions to control its every function.

Although DNA code is remarkably complex, it's the information translation system connected to that code that really baffles science. Like any language, letters and words mean nothing outside the language convention used to give those letters and words meaning. This is modern information theory at its core. A simple binary example of information theory is the "Midnight Ride of Paul Revere." In that famous story, Mr. Revere was to put one light in the window of the farmhouse if the British came by land, and two lights if they came by sea. Without a shared language convention between Paul Revere and his fellow Patriots, that simple communication effort would mean nothing. Well, take that simple example and multiply by a factor containing many zeros.

We now know that the DNA molecule is an intricate message system. To claim that DNA arose by random material forces is to say that information can arise by random material forces. Many scientists argue that the chemical building blocks of the DNA molecule can be explained by natural evolutionary processes. However, they must realize that the material base of a message is completely independent of the information transmitted. Thus, the chemical building blocks have nothing to do with the origin of the complex message. As a simple illustration, the information content of the clause "nature was designed" has nothing to do with the writing material used, whether ink, paint, chalk or crayon. In fact, the clause can be written in binary code, Morse code or smoke signals, but the message remains the same, independent of the medium. There is obviously no relationship between the information and the material base used to transmit it. Some current theories argue that self-organizing properties within the base chemicals themselves created the information in the first DNA molecule. Others argue that external self-organizing forces created the first DNA molecule. However, all of these theories must hold to the illogical conclusion that the material used to transmit the information also produced the information itself. Contrary to the current theories of evolutionary scientists, the information contained within the genetic code must be entirely independent of the chemical makeup of the DNA molecule.

398 posted on 02/17/2003 9:57:53 AM PST by Southack (Media bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies ]


To: Southack
I'm glad I hadn't yet left when you posted this.

quote from your explanation of DNA "DNA arose by random material forces is to say that information can arise by random material forces"

But this is exactly what crystals do everyday. If you would like I can grow you some crystals from a complex soup of chemicals as if from magic. That magic is this "random material force ".


Are you saying that crystals don't contain information? Even if the information is less complex it is still order rising from disorder. Information rising from chaos.



quote from the article" Thus, the chemical building blocks have nothing to do with the origin of the complex message"

This is the same as in a crystal but on a less complex scale.


quote "However, all of these theories must hold to the illogical conclusion that the material used to transmit the information also produced the information itself."


It didn't chemical reactions and natural molecular bonding created the information just as it does in crystalline formations.


No where in the article does it say DNA processes information only that it contains information in its own "secret" language. I admit DNA contains information so what so do many molecular structures.



If you want to highlight any part of the article as supporting your previously stated point please do and when I am on I'll explain very simply why it does not. (I will also state this article is biased toward the creationist side but does not provide any evidence for a creator)
403 posted on 02/17/2003 10:21:36 AM PST by Sentis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies ]

To: Southack
Excellent post Southack; minor differences of opinion on the importance of base 4 aside, we're in close agreeement on the paramount importance of the information expressed therein, and that it did not evolve spontaneously.

A sentence near the end of the post makes my point about base 4, e.g. "There is obviously no relationship between the information and the material base used to transmit it." Base 4 makes some good sense from an engineering perspective, but DNA would be no less amazing in any base.

408 posted on 02/17/2003 11:07:53 AM PST by captain11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 398 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson