What's new
By:

Science vs. Creationism

Scat said:
I think Colton may have referenced this earlier. Don't know if he posted a link or not. If so, oh well. Here it is again. An astrophysicist answering questions related to creationism vs. science.

https://medium.com/p/8712e42fbb0d
Click to expand...

No, I haven't seen that before. But they look like good responses, and #3 is very similar to what I did say earlier in the thread.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Is DNA more or less ordered than the general disorder of the universe?
Click to expand...

By DNA, are you referring to DNA as its biochemical structure? Or rather, the science of genomics?

Because if we pooled every super-computer and ran it until the end of time, we still would not be able to completely and precisely sequence the entire genome of a single human-being, due to the hyper-randomness, unexpected-repetitivity, and ambiguity of genomics & epigenomics.


Most human genetic sequencing has been exon-centered (which constitute around ~1-2% of our DNA) while the rest of DNA is scrapped as "junk DNA", due to a combination of us either not devising ways to get them to be transcribed in the lab, or the fact that DNA does not need to be transcribed into an mRNA or protein molecule in order to be biochemically active. We can only sequence DNA (via shotgun-sequencing) via 500 base-pair reads at a time, despite the fact that some DNA strands can be tandem-repeats over tens-of-thousands of base pairs. I'm sure you could comprehend the mathematical nightmare that this would entail, as the computers would need to handle n^x calculations just to entertain every possibility of every read used to sequence the single genome.

Consequently, we tend to identify only 2% of the DNA, and only the ones that are short, and non-repetitive enough (while undertaking massive mathematical assumptions) due to the complexity of an organism's genome.


The paper mentioned in this article appraised 80% of human DNA as biochemically active, and it was published in Nature: https://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/09/junk_no_more_en_1064001.html.




So to answer your question: perhaps it is ordered quite definitely, however we are no-where near understand Genomics completely, much like we are no where near using mathematics to properly-modelling the disorder of the universe.
 
dalamon said:
By DNA, are you referring to DNA as its biochemical structure? Or rather, the science of genomics?

Because if we pooled every super-computer and ran it until the ned of time, we still would not be able to completely and precisely sequence the entire genome of a human-being, due to the hyper-randomness, unexpected-repetitivity, and ambiguity of genomics & epigenomics.


Most human genetic sequencing has been exon-centered (which constitute around ~1-2% of our DNA) while the rest of DNA is scrapped as "junk DNA", due to a combination of us either not devising ways to get them to be transcribed in the lab, or the fact that DNA does not need to be transcribed into an mRNA or protein molecule in order to be biochemically active.


The paper mentioned in this article appraised 80% of human DNA as biochemically active, and it was published in Nature: https://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/09/junk_no_more_en_1064001.html
Click to expand...

So your argument is that DNA is just random crap that happens to make an intelligent human being?
 
LogGrad98 said:
So your argument is that DNA is just random crap that happens to make an intelligent human being?
Click to expand...

I added more to my post.


I'm surprised that's what you took from it. All I'm saying, is that DNA is at a point of being understood mathematically tantamount to that of the (potentially expanding) universe.

What point are you trying to make with your inquiry comparing the universe to DNA?
 
Just pointing out that without outside influence a natural system tends toward disorder, not toward order, yet DNA and evolution certainly seem more ordered than generally expected. So what is the outside influence?
 
LogGrad98 said:
Just pointing out that without outside influence a natural system tends toward disorder, not toward order, yet DNA and evolution certainly seem more ordered than generally expected. So what is the outside influence?
Click to expand...

Are you referring to DNA as a structure being very ordered? Well, it has been shown that nucleic acids can be formed from "Big-Bang like circumstances" without any sort of 'outside influence' (and I'm not even a vocal proponent of the Big Bang, btw): Oró J (1967). Fox SW, ed. Origins of Prebiological Systems and of Their Molecular Matrices. New York Academic Press. p. 137--- this is the earliest one.


I'm not sure I would call Genomics intricately ordered. At all.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Just pointing out that without outside influence a natural system tends toward disorder, not toward order, yet DNA and evolution certainly seem more ordered than generally expected. So what is the outside influence?
Click to expand...

But why we have mutations and congenital diseases if "outside influence" would have made everything in perfect order? Isn't it obvious that evolution sticks its head denying any "influenced order" ( ugly in this case ) any time Down syndrome baby or hermaphrodite is born?
 
LogGrad98 said:
Just pointing out that without outside influence a natural system tends toward disorder, not toward order, yet DNA and evolution certainly seem more ordered than generally expected. So what is the outside influence?[/QUOTE]

Natural selection!!!!!!
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top