Here we go again...

[Grugore]

I realize that I'm probably banging my head against a brick wall, but I have to believe that it's possible to change at least one mind.
Read this link.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/life-sciences/DNA-Polymerase-Function.aspx
It describes the process of DNA replication. After reading this, consider what is required for DNA, and thus life, to reproduce. Then consider the fact that the information to make the machinery that is responsible for DNA replication is encoded in the DNA that is being replicated.
Does anyone see the problem? Anyone?
It's like a book existing before it's author has been born. It's a catch-22 and proof of a Creator. At least for any sane person it is.

 

[Jack]

"I realize that I'm probably banging my head against a brick wall ..."
Jack; Yeah. That's a pretty good guess, Grugore.

 

[Nomad]

I realize that I'm probably banging my head against a brick wall, but I have to believe that it's possible to change at least one mind.
Read this link.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/life-sciences/DNA-Polymerase-Function.aspx
It describes the process of DNA replication. After reading this, consider what is required for DNA, and thus life, to reproduce. Then consider the fact that the information to make the machinery that is responsible for DNA replication is encoded in the DNA that is being replicated.
Does anyone see the problem? Anyone?
It's like a book existing before it's author has been born. It's a catch-22 and proof of a Creator. At least for any sane person it is.

Not if the "book" had billions of years to be "written".

 

[kudzu]

I realize that I'm probably banging my head against a brick wall, but I have to believe that it's possible to change at least one mind.
Read this link.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/life-sciences/DNA-Polymerase-Function.aspx
It describes the process of DNA replication. After reading this, consider what is required for DNA, and thus life, to reproduce. Then consider the fact that the information to make the machinery that is responsible for DNA replication is encoded in the DNA that is being replicated.
Does anyone see the problem? Anyone?
It's like a book existing before it's author has been born. It's a catch-22 and proof of a Creator. At least for any sane person it is.

Grugore, you don't know anything about Science and even less about scripture. The creation story was borrowed from Sumer.. and even the ancient Jewish sages knew it wasn't history or science.

 

[jimmymccready]

. . . all of which, kudzu, means nothing in terms of the beginning of life.

No one has the logic, language, or symbols to disprove the existence of divinity.

Grugore's mistake is believing that the tools of science can prove divinity exists.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I realize that I'm probably banging my head against a brick wall, but I have to believe that it's possible to change at least one mind.
Read this link.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news-medical.net/amp/life-sciences/DNA-Polymerase-Function.aspx
It describes the process of DNA replication. After reading this, consider what is required for DNA, and thus life, to reproduce. Then consider the fact that the information to make the machinery that is responsible for DNA replication is encoded in the DNA that is being replicated.
Does anyone see the problem? Anyone?
It's like a book existing before it's author has been born. It's a catch-22 and proof of a Creator.

The procedure encoded in DNA for replicating DNA is not the only method of replicating DNA. Molecular biologists often use polymerase chain reactions to replicate DNA, for instance. Obviously once the first bit of proto-life developed the ability to encode its method for DNA replication in its own DNA, that bit of proto-life had a huge advantage, replicated rapidly, and displaced whatever proto-life had existed before that replicated through more haphazard and random methods.

Let me put it another way, many computer languages have compilers that are written in that same computer language. This is not some magical catch-22 proof of God, obviously. At some point there was a compiler written in a different language (probably C or assembly), and they used that compiler to compile the compiler written in its own language. After that point, they can compile new versions of the compiler using that self-hosted compiler and no longer need the older compilers written in more basic languages.

At least for any sane person it is.

That's a bit arrogant, don't you think?

 

[Grugore]

The procedure encoded in DNA for replicating DNA is not the only method of replicating DNA. Molecular biologists often use polymerase chain reactions to replicate DNA, for instance. Obviously once the first bit of proto-life developed the ability to encode its method for DNA replication in its own DNA, that bit of proto-life had a huge advantage, replicated rapidly, and displaced whatever proto-life had existed before that replicated through more haphazard and random methods.

Let me put it another way, many computer languages have compilers that are written in that same computer language. This is not some magical catch-22 proof of God, obviously. At some point there was a compiler written in a different language (probably C or assembly), and they used that compiler to compile the compiler written in its own language. After that point, they can compile new versions of the compiler using that self-hosted compiler and no longer need the older compilers written in more basic languages.



That's a bit arrogant, don't you think?

So, let me get this straight. It seems to me that you actually believe that life created itself. Is that what you're saying here?