E X P E L L E D

dadman · Post by **dadman** » Fri Aug 19, 2011 10:02 pm

. . . . . . . . see: Random Ramblings

there are those who will not entertain scientific truth .. it doesn't fit their box

dadman · Post by **dadman** » Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:03 pm

DNA is code .. DNA does NOT derive from an intelligent source.

If you are saying that code does not derive from an intelligent source ..
then my question is:
name a code that does not derive from said intelligent source

but yes .. we do agree that DNA is code

Wyvern · Post by **Wyvern** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 12:13 pm

dadman wrote:DNA is code .. DNA does NOT derive from an intelligent source.

If you are saying that code does not derive from an intelligent source ..
then my question is:
name a code that does not derive from said intelligent source

but yes .. we do agree that DNA is code

I guess it depends on what you consider an intelligent source then doesn't it. The colors many poisonous animals have is code to advertise they are poisonous and many non poisonous animals have co-opted the code and use very similar color schemes. A bees dance is coded to tell her fellow workers where a good patch of flowers are. A crickets chirp is code to tell female crickets he is looking for a mate. Inside each molecule of water is the code to create a unique crystalline shape when frozen. Inside each carbon atom is coded the ability to form a diamond if exposed to the right environment.

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 8:35 pm

dadman wrote:display any code that does NOT derive from an intelligent source

First, how about defining 'code'. In many respects, DNA is not 'code', it is chemistry. The term 'code' is an analogy.

If you want an example about 'code' that does not derive from an intelligent source, the making of a snowflake.

micatala · Post by **micatala** » Sun Sep 04, 2011 9:20 pm

dadman wrote:poor Bob . . . guess he got all beat up again

Moderator Final Warning

Warnings are an indication a member should change their behavior. Continuing to make snide comments about or directed at another member is against the rules, and you have been warned several times.

This is a final warning.

Please review the Rules.

______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

SailingCyclops · Post by **SailingCyclops** » Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:02 am

Goat wrote: First, how about defining 'code'. In many respects, DNA is not 'code', it is chemistry. The term 'code' is an analogy.

If you want an example about 'code' that does not derive from an intelligent source, the making of a snowflake.

Exactly!
[center][youtube][/youtube][/center]

More here:

Bob

dadman · Post by **dadman** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:32 pm

Goat = "First, how about defining 'code'. In many respects, DNA is not 'code', it is chemistry.
The term 'code' is an analogy

CODE IS DEFINED as communication between an encoder (a writer or speaker) and a decoder (a reader or listener) using agreed upon symbols . . . DNA's definition as a LITERAL CODE (and not a figurative one) is nearly universal in the entire body of biological literature since the 1960's . . . DNA code has much in common with human language and computer languages . . . DNA transcription is an encoding / decoding mechanism isomorphic with Claude Shannon's 1948 model: The sequence of base pairs is encoded into messenger RNA which is decoded into proteins .. Genetic information passes from DNA to an RNA copy and then is READ in the cell by the the ribosome which makes a protein molecule based on the genetic information encoded in DNA. This is the central tenet of molecular biology . . . Information theory terms and ideas applied to DNA are not metaphorical .. but in fact quite literal in every way . . . In other words, the information theory argument for design is not based on analogy at all .. It is direct application of mathematics to DNA, which by definition is a code.

If you want an example about 'code' that does not derive from an intelligent source, the making of a snowflake.

The difference between codes and patterns

Patterns occur naturally .. no help required from a 'designer' . . .
Many patterns occur in nature without the help of a designer ..
snowflakes .. tornadoes .. hurricanes .. sand dunes .. stalactites .. rivers and ocean waves . . .
These patterns are the natural result of what scientists categorize as chaos and fractals ..
These things are well-understood and we experience them every day

Codes .. however .. do not occur without a designer . . .
Examples of symbolic codes include music .. blueprints ..
languages like English and Chinese .. computer programs .. and yes .. DNA

The essential distinction is the difference between a pattern and a code ..
Chaos can produce patterns .. but it has never been shown to produce codes or symbols . . .
Codes and symbols store information .. which is not a property of matter and energy alone ..
Information itself is a separate entity.

SailingCyclops · Post by **SailingCyclops** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 1:48 pm

dadman wrote:CODE IS DEFINED[/b] as communication between an encoder (a writer or speaker) and a decoder (a reader or listener) using agreed upon symbols . . .

Instead of repeating the same disinformation in a forum which is rarely viewed, why don't you engage in real debate? Are you fearful that your hypothesis can't stand the light of day?

Your statement about "CODE", among other things is being debated here: There is no code

Unless you come out of the shadows, and debate in public, all that can be surmised is that you can't defend your indefensible position, and are fearful of attempting to do so. Which would also imply that your "EXPELLED" post is nothing more than ID lies and disinformation.

What are you afraid of? Don't you have faith that your god will guide you in debate? O' Ye of little faith!

Bob

Goat · Post by **Goat** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 5:23 pm

dadman wrote:Goat = "First, how about defining 'code'. In many respects, DNA is not 'code', it is chemistry.
The term 'code' is an analogy

CODE IS DEFINED as communication between an encoder (a writer or speaker) and a decoder (a reader or listener) using agreed upon symbols . . . DNA's definition as a LITERAL CODE (and not a figurative one) is nearly universal in the entire body of biological literature since the 1960's . . . DNA code has much in common with human language and computer languages . . . DNA transcription is an encoding / decoding mechanism isomorphic with Claude Shannon's 1948 model: The sequence of base pairs is encoded into messenger RNA which is decoded into proteins .. Genetic information passes from DNA to an RNA copy and then is READ in the cell by the the ribosome which makes a protein molecule based on the genetic information encoded in DNA. This is the central tenet of molecular biology . . . Information theory terms and ideas applied to DNA are not metaphorical .. but in fact quite literal in every way . . . In other words, the information theory argument for design is not based on analogy at all .. It is direct application of mathematics to DNA, which by definition is a code.

If you want an example about 'code' that does not derive from an intelligent source, the making of a snowflake.

The difference between codes and patterns

Patterns occur naturally .. no help required from a 'designer' . . .
Many patterns occur in nature without the help of a designer ..
snowflakes .. tornadoes .. hurricanes .. sand dunes .. stalactites .. rivers and ocean waves . . .
These patterns are the natural result of what scientists categorize as chaos and fractals ..
These things are well-understood and we experience them every day

Codes .. however .. do not occur without a designer . . .
Examples of symbolic codes include music .. blueprints ..
languages like English and Chinese .. computer programs .. and yes .. DNA

The essential distinction is the difference between a pattern and a code ..
Chaos can produce patterns .. but it has never been shown to produce codes or symbols . . .
Codes and symbols store information .. which is not a property of matter and energy alone ..
Information itself is a separate entity.

Well then, if a snowflake is not a code, then neither is DNA.

and, would you please support your claim that 'Information itself is a separate entity'.

Is the rock strata a 'code' and symbols"?? It does convey information to the geologist about the history of that rock, and how it got formed.

SailingCyclops · Post by **SailingCyclops** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 7:00 pm

dadman wrote: Codes and symbols store information .. which is not a property of matter and energy alone ..
Information itself is a separate entity.

So the spectrum of a star,

[center]

[/center]

which is information about the star's chemistry, and other properties, is not information because it was not transmitted by some intelligence?

dadman · Post by **dadman** » Thu Sep 08, 2011 9:07 pm

If there are pebbles below a rapids
There are pebbles below a rapids . . .

There is NO CODED INFORMATION associated with them ..
unless you measure their size .. in which case you have created information to describe the pebbles . . . based on your chosen symbols and units of measurement . . . Same with orientation of sand dunes .. layers of hailstone .. Those objects represent only themselves . . . there is no encoding / decoding mechanism within these material objects . . . such as there is in DNA . . . . If someone says the layers of a hailstone are an encoding mechanism .. I reply that there is no convention of symbols .. nor is there a decoding mechanism