Cells have a codified description of themselves in digital form stored in genes and have the machinery to transform that blueprint through information transfer from genotype to phenotype, into an identical representation in analog 3D form, the physical 'reality' of that description. Using Bayesian probability, or abductive reasoning, an intelligent cause is the best explanation.

Cells definitely do not contain codified descriptions of themselves in digital form. No such description is contained in genes.

This is not a good start to either i) confidently assert something untrue or ii) engage in dishonesty

Using Bayesian probability, or abductive reasoning, an intelligent cause is the best explanation.

Seems to me like it's one thing to say that you can, and another thing to actually do it.

Show your working.


Elshamah!

Couldn't remember who you were here before, but got it now: http://www.rationalskepticism.org/member/Jireh/

"It's a code dude but epigenetics proves it wrong but it's definitely a machine. Fine-tuned bayesian stochastic fractal!!"

Meh

Correction. Using actual scientific analysis, taking into account the fact that the "machinery" in question is a vast series of chemical reactions, the best explanation is that testable natural processes are responsible, for which we have vast amounts of evidence, as opposed to a cartoon magic man, for which we have zero evidence.

Indeed, life IS chemistry writ large. Millions of chemical reactions are taking place in your body right now, and if some of those reactions STOP, you DIE.

[quote="Spearthrower";p="2788782"]Cells definitely do not contain codified descriptions of themselves in digital form. No such descri

Of course, they do. All you could eventually disagree with is claiming that it's not ONLY genetic data. I agree at least on that. Epigenetic information plays at least the same, if not even a more important role in life.

Richard Dawkins River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life 1996
What is truly revolutionary about molecular biology in the post-Watson-Crick era is that it has become digital. After Watson and Crick, we know that genes themselves, within their minute internal structure, are long strings of pure digital information. What is more, they are truly digital, in the full and strong sense of computers and compact disks, not in the weak sense of the nervous system. The machine code of the genes is uncannily computerlike. Apart from differences in jargon, the pages of a molecular-biology journal might be interchanged with those of a computer-engineering journal. . . .Our genetic system, which is the universal system of all life on the planet, is digital to the core. Every cell in your body contains the equivalent of forty-six immense data tapes, reeling off digital characters via numerous reading heads working simultaneously. In every cell, these tapes – the chromosomes – contain the same information, but the reading heads in different kinds of cells seek out different parts of the database for their own specialist purposes. Genes are pure information – information that can be encoded, recoded and decoded, without any degradation or change of meaning. Pure information can be copied and, since it is digital information, the fidelity of the copying can be immense. DNA characters are copied with an accuracy that rivals anything modern engineers can do. What lies at the heart of every living thing is not a fire, warm breath, not a ‘spark of life’. It is information, words, instructions…Think of a billion discrete digital characters…If you want to understand life think about technology – Richard Dawkins (Dawkins 1996, 112)

DNA Is Called The Blueprint Of Life: Here’s Why
OCTOBER 26, 2017
DNA is called the blueprint of life because it is the instruction manual to create, grow, function and reproduce life on Earth similar to a blueprint of a house. 10
https://sciencetrends.com/dna-called-bl ... ife-heres/

BLUEPRINT How DNA makes us who we are
DNA is the major systematic force, the blueprint, that makes us who we are.
https://www.amazon.com/Blueprint-How-DN ... nskepti-20

Why is DNA called the blueprint of life?
Shawn Burgess, Ph.D.:My research area involves studying developmental processes and their relation to human genetic disease.
Because all the information necessary to make a living organism is stored in the DNA. No other part of the cell contains a permanent record of how to make a new cell, or a new tissue, or a new organism. 3
https://www.genome.gov/dnaday/q.cfm?aid=762&year=2009

DNA: Blueprint for Life
It is the genetic blueprint, or recipe, for making all living things. Almost every cell in your body contains DNA and all the information needed to make you what you are, from the way you look to which hand you write with. 4
https://web.archive.org/web/20170602134 ... t-for-life

Calilasseia wrote:Correction. Using actual scientific analysis, taking into account the fact that the "machinery" in question is a vast series of chemical reactions, the best explanation is that testable natural processes are responsible, for which we have vast amounts of evidence, as opposed to a cartoon magic man, for which we have zero evidence.

Indeed, life IS chemistry writ large. Millions of chemical reactions are taking place in your body right now, and if some of those reactions STOP, you DIE.

Life is not only based on chemistry and matter, but also on the information. It's software and hardware. Life is driven, directed, constructed, and operated by the instructional assembly and operation-directing information. Or, in ID parlance, complex specified information. Its digital data. Denying this is denying reality and facts.

The problem of information Norbert Weiner - MIT Mathematician - Father of Cybernetics
"Information is information, not matter or energy. No materialism which does not admit this can survive at the present day."

Edward J. Steele Cause of Cambrian Explosion - Terrestrial or Cosmic? August 2018
The transformation of an ensemble of appropriately chosen biological monomers (e.g. amino acids, nucleotides) into a primitive living cell capable of further evolution appears to require overcoming an information hurdle of superastronomical proportions, an event that could not have happened within the time frame of the Earth except, we believe, as a miracle. All laboratory experiments attempting to simulate such an event have so far led to dismal failure. It would thus seem reasonable to go to the biggest available “venue” in relation to space and time. A cosmological origin of life thus appears plausible and overwhelmingly likely to us
https://sci-hub.ren/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2018.03.004

David T.F Dryden How much of protein sequence space has been explored by life on Earth? 15 April 2008
A typical estimate of the size of sequence space is 20^100 (approx. 10^130) for a protein of 100 amino acids in which any of the normally occurring 20 amino acids can be found. This number is indeed gigantic
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/ ... .2008.0085

Bit by Bit: The Darwinian Basis of Life Gerald F. Joyce Published: May 8, 2012
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/a ... io.1001323
Suppose that a polymer (like RNA) that is assembled into four chains of 40 subunits (quaternary heteropolymer) . Then there would be 10^24 possible compositions. To represent all of these compositions at least once, and thus to establish a certainty that this simple ribozyme could have materialized, requires 27 kg of RNA chains, which classifies spontaneous emergence as a highly implausible event.

KatarzynaAdamala OPEN QUESTIONS IN ORIGIN OF LIFE: EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES ON THE ORIGIN OF NUCLEIC ACIDS AND PROTEINS WITH SPECIFIC AND FUNCTIONAL SEQUENCES BY A CHEMICAL SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY APPROACH February 2014
There is a conceptual problem, namely the emergence of specific sequences among a vast array of possible ones, the huge “sequence space”, leading to the question “why these macromolecules, and not the others?” One of the main open questions in the field of the origin of life is the biogenesis of proteins and nucleic acids as ordered sequences of monomeric residues, possibly in many identical copies. The first important consideration is that functional proteins and nucleic acids are chemically speaking copolymers, i.e., polymer formed by several different monomeric units, ordered in a very specific way.

Fenrir wrote:"It's a code dude but epigenetics proves it wrong but it's definitely a machine. Fine-tuned bayesian stochastic fractal!!"

Meh

Epigenetics bolsters my case, not yours. Epigenetic information exceeds vastly genetic information.

María A. Sánchez-Romero: The bacterial epigenome 14 November 2019
In all domains of life, genomes contain epigenetic information superimposed over the nucleotide sequence. Epigenetic signals control DNA–protein interactions and can cause phenotypic change in the absence of mutation. A nearly universal mechanism of epigenetic signalling is DNA methylation. In bacteria, DNA methylation has roles in genome defence, chromosome replication and segregation, nucleoid organization, cell cycle control, DNA repair and regulation of transcription. In many bacterial species, DNA methylation controls reversible switching (phase variation) of gene expression, a phenomenon that generates phenotypic cell variants. The formation of epigenetic lineages enables the adaptation of bacterial populations to harsh or changing environments and modulates the interaction of pathogens with their eukaryotic hosts.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-019-0286-2

Genetic:
1.DNA Code sequence

Epigenetic ( beyond or outside the genetic information ) :

1. The 31 Genetic Codes
2. The Adhesion Code
3. The Apoptosis Code
4. The Bioelectric Code
5. The Biophoton Code
6. The Calcium Code
7. The Chaperone Code
8. The Chromatin Code
9. The Circular motif ( ribosome) Code
10. The Coactivator/corepressor/epigenetic Code
11. The Code of human language
12. The Hidden Code within the Genetic Code
13. The DNA methylation Code
14. The Differentiation Code
15. The Domain substrate specificity Code of Nonribosomal peptide synthetases (NRPS)
16. The Error correcting Code
17. The Genomic regulatory Code
18. The Glycomic Code
19. The Histone Code
20. The HOX Code
21. The immune response code, or language
22. The Lamin Code
23. The MeshCODE
24. The Metabolic Code
25. The Myelin Code
26. The Neuronal spike-rate Code
27. The Non-ribosomal Code
28. The Nucleosome Code
29. The Olfactory Code
30. The Operon Code
31. The Phosphorylation Code
32. The Post-translational modification Code for transcription factors
33. The RNA Code
34. The Ribosomal Code
35. The Riboswitch Code
36. The Splicing Codes
37. The Signal transduction Code
38. The Signal Integration Codes
39. The Sugar Code
40. The Synaptic Adhesive Code
41. The Talin Code
42. The Transcription factor Code
43. The Transcriptional cis-regulatory Code
44. The Tubulin Code
45. The Ubiquitin Code

False equivalence for 1000 thanks.

Fenrir wrote:False equivalence for 1000 thanks.

Ok. Explain the relationship of the amino-acid sequence in proteins, and nucleotide sequence in DNA, and RNA.
What is the function of DNA?

Explain how computer languages and DNA sequences are totally the same thing therefore god*.


* undefined

Fenrir wrote:Explain how computer languages and DNA sequences are totally the same thing therefore god*.


* undefined

1. The cell has a sophisticated information-processing system. It is not only analogous to a man-made computer but operates literally as a computer.
2. Computer programs require programmers, conscious agents with knowledge and foresight who can code the needed instructions, in the right sequence, to generate a functioning and information-rich program.
3. Since cells contain an information storage system (DNA), a code language (the genetic code), and instructions encoded through the genetic code stored in DNA, and an information transmission system, that is 1. Encoding ( transcription into messenger RNA (mRNA) through RNA polymerase enzyme catalysts (transcription), 2. Sending (mRNA), and 3. Translation (mRNA to amino acids through the Ribosome), all this requires a programmer. The programmer is with high probability an intelligent designer (God).

DNA in the living cell is a computing environment that can usefully be described, understood, and studied using computer terminology. It has all the elements we use in programming to do things. DNA really is digital, 2 bits per nucleotide, 100 megabytes of DNA for the puffer fish, 750MB for a human being, 5 kilobytes for a virus 2

How the DNA Computer Program Makes You and Me 1
Embryogenesis most resembles a genetic computer program that produces a three-dimensional living organism. Every gene is like a single line of code. All the genes together form the master DNA program, which is copied and run simultaneously in trillions of cells to achieve this miracle of physicochemical engineering. Genes, along with their promoters, regulators and inhibitors, perform all the control operations that software programs do. Just as a single line of software code may initiate sweeping changes or be merely incremental, a single top-level gene may initiate the building of an entire body or organ (analogous to a top-level line that invokes a subroutine “MakeEye”) or may merely add a small building block molecule in a tissue (like the line n = n + 1). Our genetic program does amazing things like generating its own building materials programmatically. The genetic program uses parallel coordination techniques that have only recently been explored in software, such as “swarm programming.” Swarm programming is a paradigm in which a group of cells or robots that contain identical copies of a master program nevertheless behave differently based on their location within the group and on how their neighbors are distributed.
https://www.quantamagazine.org/how-the- ... -20180405/

I asked for explanation. Not assertion.

Already dealt with creationist bullshit about "information" here.

In one of the many sockpuppet arses this guy had his hand up, he was so very concerned about why Creationists are called 'liars'.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/creat ... 39699.html

That is a acusation, i hear constantly being thrown at me. That i am lying. Lets look a littlebit closer to it.

This thread is the answer to that question.

Deceitfully creates an account pretending not to be someone who's banned.
Writes a thread in which the very first sentence can only be either an ignorant falsehood or an intentional lie.
That falsehood is then called out.
Then it's a wall of deceit and bullshit.

This is why Creationists are called liars - because they can't stop themselves from lying. It's an endemic aspect of their ideological allegiance. It's a feature, not a bug.

Truth prevails wrote:
What is the function of DNA?

The production of proteins.

Which is why you can't truthfully say that a cell, which is comprised of more than just proteins, contains a description of itself, codified or otherwise. Even DNA doesn't contain a description of itself and is not itself a protein - it is a protein-production system that is highly ordered through gazillions of generations of selection.

https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/m ... d-function

DNA is the information molecule. It stores instructions for making other large molecules, called proteins. These instructions are stored inside each of your cells, distributed among 46 long structures called chromosomes. These chromosomes are made up of thousands of shorter segments of DNA, called genes. Each gene stores the directions for making protein fragments, whole proteins, or multiple specific proteins.

My only regret is...

Using Bayesian probability, or abductive reasoning, an intelligent cause is the best explanation.

Not having a comfy seat and some popcorn to watch that particular show.

Spearthrower wrote:In one of the many sockpuppet arses this guy had his hand up, he was so very concerned about why Creationists are called 'liars'.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/creat ... 39699.html

That is a acusation, i hear constantly being thrown at me. That i am lying. Lets look a littlebit closer to it.

This thread is the answer to that question.

Deceitfully creates an account pretending not to be someone who's banned.
Writes a thread in which the very first sentence can only be either an ignorant falsehood or an intentional lie.
That falsehood is then called out.
Then it's a wall of deceit and bullshit.

This is why Creationists are called liars - because they can't stop themselves from lying. It's an endemic aspect of their ideological allegiance. It's a feature, not a bug.

Indeed, it's a testament to how worthless the creationist wank fantasy is, that its fanboys have to resort to duplicity on a grand scale to peddle it.

Honestly, how broken is your brain to name yourself truth prevails?

Was that an example of an e-Gish gallop?