The "Digital Code" of DNA

Then why do you keep arguing with me? I repeat: for @#$% sake, please tell us what you are referring to.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

That's not the issue here.The issue is whether or not genetic information is a "digital code" that is somehow above and beyond the structure of the DNA molecule.The existence or non-existence of a designer is irrelevant and Dean Kenyon's conversion to hand-waving incredulity is irrelevant.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Illustrative of Kenyon's incredulity, yes. Since he provides no basis whatsoever for his assertions, illustrative of his handwaving too.Pertinent to the topic, no.We are not discussing "a chemical evolutionary origin for even the simplest of cells". We are not discussing origins of any kind.Regardless of the origin of the simplest of cells, is there a "code" that is not accounted for by the chemical structure of the DNA molecule? Nobody has shown any evidence that there is.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Then why do you keep arguing?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I haven't said anything of the kind.If you read the OP:

quote:

---

I argue, as do many others:
DNA/RNA are just chemicals. Not something more thanks to this "digital code". This is not a hinderance to any hypothesis of abiogenesis.

---

that is what I'm agreeing with.If you have any evidence that that is incorrect, please present it and stop wasting my time with the same prattle over and over again.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Been there. Done that.All molecules contain information in their structures. All molecules do chemistry based on their structures.The "code" is simply a human construct used to help understand the structure. It's simpler to write a short code-word than to draw the whole structure of the molecule. That's all the "code" is. It isn't something inherent in the molecule itself.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I didn't say that. I said that the "code" is the structure of the molecule. Mutations consist of atoms - and/or groups of atoms - "moving" to a different location on the structure, don't they? How does that have anything to do with "digits"?

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Read the OP. That's the only question here.If you agree that there is no "digital code" except for the chemistry of the molecule, then we're done.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

That isn't clear at all. I have asked you repeatedly, over several threads, to back up that statement. Kindly show us, once and for all, something that is not accounted for by known chemical principles. False, as I have explained repeatedly. All molecules hold the same code - the principles of chemical bonding. All molecules "inherit" the same principles of chemical bonding.
The "code" is nothing more than that.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

If there's a difference, show it. Because the "order of the bondings" - the structure of the molecule - determines the reactions that it undergoes. Move one functional group and the behaviour of the molecule is completely different. Exactly. It doesn't "impair" it's function - it just changes how it functions. Different ordering produces different reactions which produce different products. It's the same for any molecule.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Their ordering is based on the same chemical principles. Irrelevant. The information is stored/carried in exactly the same way. The information itself is different, but the way it is stored and used is exactly the same. But it's the principles that we're talking about. You claimed earlier that DNA operates on some phantom unknown principle.There's nothing fundamentally different between a DNA molecule and any other molecule. They all bond in the same ways. They all vary in their behaviour based on their structure alone. They all carry their own information in the same way.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Nonsense. A code has been applied to nucleic acids to make it easier to understand the structure.Here's water: HOHHere's methanol: CH₃OHWe can also call it: methyl-OH"Methyl" is just a code-word for "CH₃". It doesn't indicate different principles - it's just shorthand. Same thing with your supposed "digital code" in DNA. It's just a shorthand method of describing the structure of the molecule. Nothing more. For @#$#@#%$#@# sake, SHOW us how chemical bonding principles fail to explain "ordering" in nucleic acids. And that's the only reason. The chemical principles governing a quartz crystal are identical to the principles governing nucleic acids.Edited by Ringo, : Fixed mismatched quotes.Edited by Ringo, : CapItaLIzAtIOn.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

I dunno. This is about the fourth thread where I've tried to get through to him.In 1972, when Nixon was re-elected, defeating McGovern, somebody quipped that, "America would rather have a smart crook than an honest fool as president." I try to take people at their word and accept that they really are as dopey as they pretend to be.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Instead of repeating and repeating that empty claim, why not produce some evidence?I am saying that all elephants are mammals. If you claim to have discovered a reptilephant, the onus is on you to produce the evidence.I'm also saying that all molecules follow the same chemical principles. If you claim to have discovered an exception, the onus is on you to produce the evidence.I have asked you and asked you and asked you to produce the evidence for your claims and all you have produced is nothing and nothing and nothing. You really aren't paying attention, are you?I have said repeatedly that different molecules have different behaviours and undergo different reactions to produce different products. But no molecule operates under different principles.There's nothing magical about producing proteins - it's just another product of just another reaction.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

All you did was drop their names. You haven't shown in any way that they agree with you.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC