• Welcome to Talk Jesus

    A true bible based, Jesus centered online community. Join over 11,000 members today

    Register Log In

DNA - Double Helix

Users who viewed this discussion (Total:0)

Administrator
Staff Member
DNA Double Helix: A Recent Discovery of Enormous Complexity
The DNA Double Helix is one of the greatest scientific discoveries of all time. First described by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953, DNA is the famous molecule of genetics that establishes each organism's physical characteristics. It wasn't until mid-2001, that the Human Genome Project and Celera Genomics jointly presented the true nature and complexity of the digital code inherent in DNA. We now understand that there are approximately 35,000 genes in each human DNA molecule, comprised of chemical bases arranged in approximately 3 billion precise sequences. Even the DNA molecule for the single-celled bacterium, E. coli, contains enough information to fill all the books in any of the world's largest libraries.

DNA Double Helix: The "Basics"
DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is a double-stranded molecule that is twisted into a helix like a spiral staircase. Each strand is comprised of a sugar-phosphate backbone and numerous base chemicals attached in pairs. The four bases that make up the stairs in the spiraling staircase are adenine (A), thymine (T), cytosine (C) and guanine (G). These stairs act as the "letters" in the genetic alphabet, combining into complex sequences to form the words, sentences and paragraphs that act as instructions to guide the formation and functioning of the host cell. Maybe even more appropriately, the A, T, C and G in the genetic code of the DNA molecule can be compared to the "0" and "1" in the binary code of computer software. Like software to a computer, the DNA code is a genetic language that communicates information to the organic cell.

The DNA code, like a floppy disk of binary code, is quite simple in its basic paired structure. However, it's the sequencing and functioning of that code that's enormously complex. Through recent technologies like x-ray crystallography, we now know that the cell is not a "blob of protoplasm", but rather a microscopic marvel that is more complex than the space shuttle. The cell is very complicated, using vast numbers of phenomenally precise DNA instructions to control its every function.

Although DNA code is remarkably complex, it's the information translation system connected to that code that really baffles science. Like any language, letters and words mean nothing outside the language convention used to give those letters and words meaning. This is modern information theory at its core. A simple binary example of information theory is the "Midnight Ride of Paul Revere." In that famous story, Mr. Revere asks a friend to put one light in the window of the North Church if the British came by land, and two lights if they came by sea. Without a shared language convention between Paul Revere and his friend, that simple communication effort would mean nothing. Well, take that simple example and multiply by a factor containing many zeros.

We now know that the DNA molecule is an intricate message system. To claim that DNA arose by random material forces is to say that information can arise by random material forces. Many scientists argue that the chemical building blocks of the DNA molecule can be explained by natural evolutionary processes. However, they must realize that the material base of a message is completely independent of the information transmitted. Thus, the chemical building blocks have nothing to do with the origin of the complex message. As a simple illustration, the information content of the clause "nature was designed" has nothing to do with the writing material used, whether ink, paint, chalk or crayon. In fact, the clause can be written in binary code, Morse code or smoke signals, but the message remains the same, independent of the medium. There is obviously no relationship between the information and the material base used to transmit it. Some current theories argue that self-organizing properties within the base chemicals themselves created the information in the first DNA molecule. Others argue that external self-organizing forces created the first DNA molecule. However, all of these theories must hold to the illogical conclusion that the material used to transmit the information also produced the information itself. Contrary to the current theories of evolutionary scientists, the information contained within the genetic code must be entirely independent of the chemical makeup of the DNA molecule.

DNA Double Helix: Its Existence Alone Defeats any Theory of Evolution
The scientific reality of the DNA double helix can single-handedly defeat any theory that assumes life arose from non-life through materialistic forces. Evolution theory has convinced many people that the design in our world is merely "apparent" -- just the result of random, natural processes. However, with the discovery, mapping and sequencing of the DNA molecule, we now understand that organic life is based on vastly complex information code, and such information cannot be created or interpreted without a Master Designer at the cosmic keyboard.
 
Member
Geat post Chad ! The truth hurts some people ! Jewelz .... figure out who you are first ! I got you figured out .
 
Member
I have to agree with Brothersinarmst4g, Great Post, as the complexity of our world becomes more apparent, we can clearly see that the Creator, GOD, is showing himself to us. As for, the question, "what happens when we figure out the code?” that is irrelevant. To believe that DNA evolved is like believing that if I drop one million ball bearings from an airplane on to a warehouse full of typewriters that have paper loaded into them, that the novel War and Peace would be typed out on those sheets of paper. Once you figure out "truth" it is still "truth", truth does not change because someone happens to figure it out. In the Gospel of John chapter 14 verse 6 we are told; “Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” We are encouraged to discover truth, God is not afraid of us learning to understand the universe around us and even the universe within us. Therefore, if we do figure out the code, it will only confirm what God has already told us.
 
Administrator
Staff Member
I just want to clarify that I did not actually write that myself. I take a lot of these things from other sites and compile them on Talk Jesus to help us all, including myself learn more about the awesomeness of GOD :smile:

I apologize, I can't even remember where I got it from. Its clearly been a long time ago.
 
Member
I have heard of this

Hello, Im new here.


Yup I have heard of this, didn't look much into it cuz I study lots of things. This newly found evidence led one of the leading atheist philosophers of the 20th century, Anthony Flew , to admit there must be a god. At least he's a deist now... doesn't do much for his salvation, but did cause a big blow to the atheist community. (at least those who looked up to him) They were all trying to excuse and falsify his "conversion." If you ever heard an atheists say "the burden of proof is on the theist, not the atheist" they they read some of Flew's work...


Anyways, DNA, despite its complexity, cannot arise by naturalistic principles alone.. Abiogenesis violates the laws of physics and chemistry as we know it . In fact, Origin of Life Foundation, Inc. , a secular, naturalistic scientific organization, is offering $1,000,000, yes thats one million dollars, paid over several years, to anyone who comes up with a peer reviewed scientific discovery of how in the world life arose through naturalistic principles alone. Now, thats a lot of money, and they had the offer since 99 or something like that... you would think at least a good theory should be proposed, but nope. They don't have an answer, and they never will.


God is real! [slap]



Shalom,
Ben
 
Member
Oh so true, I actually have a Science degree and have studied bio-chem at uni. Have a guess what was never discussed.

More recently I have been tutoring end of high school kids in biology and again what do you think I am meant to tell them about the Urey and Miller experiments of 1953? Which to quote Voet and Voet (1995) "represents the most likely explination for the evolution of life" although to be fair they do point out that there are valid 'objections'.

Most current text books are simmialy outdated and rejecting of the place of God.

I suppose the challange is to proclaime God's glory against the backdrop of untruth, and pray for all the kids that get taught Macro-evolution (goo to you) as a fact


Voet & Voet (1995), biochemisty 2nd edn, John Wiley and Sons, New York, pp. 21
 

Similar threads


Top