Quality Control the Gold Standard

quote:

---

Yet in life the error rate in replicating the DNA molecule is about one mistake in a billion base pairs. And that is of course because every element in the Von Neumann model is present and works remarkably well in the human cell.

---

Tell that to all the victims of cancer. Or the victims of genetic birth defects. Or the animal and plant breeders who have managed to produce ever more diverse animals and crops. Or the scientists in genetics laboratories who constantly discover novel traits arising.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

I did. The DNA replication process is not even close to 100% perfect. It makes errors. Which, by the way, is exactly what is needed for evolution to occur.But the mere existence that there are mechanisms that correct some errors is in no way "evidence" for a designer.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

quote:

---

If you can't accept that fact please don't even bother replying.. I don't have the time.

---

Hee hee hee. I foresee a suspension coming.-

quote:

---

You have no concept.

---

You have no argument. The error rate in DNA replication is pretty high -- high enough that the effects are pretty easy to see from cancer victims, birth defects and spontaneous abortions, and even in laboratory studies of genomes of other organisms.And also, the exact error rate is largely irrelevant to the whether or not we should accept Intelligent [sic] Design.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

Hey, Evopeach. You are still avoiding the problem in your OP.Your argument seems to go like this:The error correction mechanism in DNA replication of the human cell is very efficient.
Therefore, there must be an intelligent designer.First of all, your premise is wrong; "very efficient" is a subjective term, and unless you give some sort of criteria for "very efficient" that is relevant to your argument, your premise is meaningless.Second, you seem to missing the entire deductive reasoning part where you explain how your conclusion follows from your premise.I think you might want to work on this a bit before you start calling everyone a moron.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

quote:

---

Yet although a replicator of sorts, very small and simplistic in size and complexity it has very high error rates .. words of the community not mine.. thus it is quite problimatical to even envision how it could evolve anything before dying.

---

Problematical for whom? Why?

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

None of the papers that I have seen that come out of the major schools (and "Patriot University" is not a major school, by the way) has ever implied that there must be an intelligent designer.Maybe you can enlighten me with the results of your, um, research.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

Nor is the subject of your OP about human built computer systems.Your argument is this:DNA replication in the human cell involves error checking and correction mechanisms which may or may not be efficient depending on what we decide to determine efficient.Therefore, by a magical wave of the hands, only an Intelligent Designer could have been responsible.So let's cut to the chase. Why are you so impressed with DNA replication that you immediately conclude there is a designer?Oh, sorry. I forgot. Your a priori assumption is that there is a designer, and now you are trying to find something you consider fantastic to try to convince the rest of us.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

quote:

---

All other observations are dependent on the true believer mentality and world view predispositions of your community.

---

Evopeach, allow me to introduce you to Ms. Kettle. I see that you two have a lot to discuss.-

quote:

---

In no case have I ever seen or been factually informed of a single experimentally varifiable, repeatable example of matter , unaided by any intellectual input past or present operate counter to our collective real experience.

---

Of course you haven't. Because once a one such example is observed, it becomes part of our collective real experience. It is a tautology to say that no one will observe something that is counter to our collective real experience. This is the problem with your posts -- they are meaningless just like this statement.-

quote:

---

Falsification it would seem is 100 years of abject failure to produce ... a new species....

---

You see, this is another problem with your posts -- you make completely factually incorrect statements like this. In fact, new species have been observed. Even creationists admit this.-

quote:

---

In no case have I ever seen or been factually informed of a single experimentally varifiable, repeatable example of matter , unaided by any intellectual input past or present operate counter to our collective real experience.

---

When you're done calling the kettle names, get back to me on making an actual logical argument concerning your OP.I will repeat your points of the OP:(1)The DNA replication process includes mechanisms for error checking and correction. These mechanisms are highly efficient.You need to include some sort of criterion for judging whether something is "highly efficient", and that criterion should be somewhat relevent to the point that you are making.(2)This mechanism could only be the result of conscious design by an intelligent entity. Again, you have included no deductive logical steps to justify this conclusion beyond your own incredulity, which is a logical fallacy.When you feel capable of making a logical argument beyond your own personal incredulity, willful ignorance of the current state of scientific research in these matters, and gratuitous insults to those who do not agree with you, please come back.Edited to include the last several paragraphs.This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 08-Feb-2006 10:00 PM

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

quote:

---

When you can stop committing the fallacy of restating peoples posts in language contrived to fit your own arguments please fell free to come back.

---

Well, if you could write a post that makes your point in a clear manner, then maybe this wouldn't be necessary for others to try to restate it.Since I am clearly a moron, why don't you try to explain the point of your OP?Your OP seems to state that you feel that the error correcting mechanisms in DNA replication are amazingly efficient. Is this correct or incorrect? If this is incorrect, what are you trying to say about DNA error correction mechanisms?Your OP seems to state that a designer must have created this mechanism. Is this correct? If not, what is it that you are trying to say about these correction mechanisms?Try to explain your point to us simpletons. I know that this is a pain for a super genius like you, but please humor us.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt