DNA code from a software engineers point of view

[carolus magnus]

DNA is a designed engineering language, not a random accumulation of variables that just happen to make a living being.

This article presents an intriguing look into that engineered language:
https://ds9a.nl/amazing-dna/

I certainly don't think the author is a creationist, or even skeptical of evolution. However the analysis is intriguing from a creationist's perspective. In particular how DNA is filled with the various staples of programming such as if/then statements.

 

[Greg Jennings]

DNA is a designed engineering language, not a random accumulation of variables that just happen to make a living being.

This article presents an intriguing look into that engineered language:
https://ds9a.nl/amazing-dna/

I certainly don't think the author is a creationist, or even skeptical of evolution. However the analysis is intriguing from a creationist's perspective. In particular how DNA is filled with the various staples of programming such as if/then statements.

There's no doubt that DNA is a complex molecule, but I do not think it requires a creator to put pieces (in this case, amino acids) together in a way that their charges balance out and maximal structural integrity is achieved. Diamonds are beautiful and incredibly strong down to the atomic level, but do you think it requires a creator to change coal into diamonds?

 

[6days]

Codes which transmits information requiring action always have an intelligent designer (Braille, Morse, traffic lights, etc). Bill Gates said that DNA is far more sophisticated than any man-made software.
DNA is just one of many, many evidences of our Creator.

 

[beameup]

If you have a program, you have to have a programmer.

Chuck Missler (background in information technology) began discussing this in the early 1990s.

 

[Stripe]

There's no doubt that DNA is a complex molecule, but I do not think it requires a creator to put pieces (in this case, amino acids) together in a way that their charges balance out and maximal structural integrity is achieved. Diamonds are beautiful and incredibly strong down to the atomic level, but do you think it requires a creator to change coal into diamonds?

Diamonds don't have code.

The discussion is not about complexity, it is about information.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Why would God create genetic info that cannot directly replicate itself?

DNA requires RNAs to copy it. And then re-translate the RNA back to DNA. Why would a creator make it like that?

 

[Stripe]

Why would God create genetic info that cannot directly replicate itself? DNA requires RNAs to copy it. And then re-translate the RNA back to DNA. Why would a creator make it like that?

Why not make it like that?

If you're such an expert on how to make people, tell us how to do it better.

Meanwhile, your diamonds post was nonsense. Are you going to retract it?

 

[gcthomas]

Codes which transmits information requiring action always have an intelligent designer (Braille, Morse, traffic lights, etc).

Your code examples all use arbitrarily chosen symbolic representations of information, and require the receiver to have a metaphorical code book to translate the symbols back into their meaning.

DNA is not a symbolic code in this way. It is the arbitrary symbolism that perhaps requires someone to invent it - there are no arbitrary symbols in DNA. No arbitrary code, no designer. Just chemistry.

 

[gcthomas]

If you have a program, you have to have a programmer.

Chuck Missler (background in information technology) began discussing this in the early 1990s.

If you define program like that, then DNA isn't a program. DNA certainly doesn't run like a program, it is just a mass of protein generation happening in parallel with the complex interactions happening away from the DNA. At best you can say there are recipes for proteins and a few logic gates restricting their production.

 

[beameup]

If you define program like that, then DNA isn't a program. DNA certainly doesn't run like a program, it is just a mass of protein generation happening in parallel with the complex interactions happening away from the DNA. At best you can say there are recipes for proteins and a few logic gates restricting their production.

You need energy to keep the "code" running, just like you need electricity to keep computer software "running".
The energy is supplied by God: in Him we live and move and exist - Acts 17:28a

“The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; for in Him we live and move and exist - Acts 17:24-28a

 

[gcthomas]

You need energy to keep the "code" running, just like you need electricity to keep computer software "running".
The energy is supplied by God: in Him we live and move and exist - Acts 17:28a

I need energy to keep the lightbulbs going, but that doesn't make it code.

 

[beameup]

I need energy to keep the lightbulbs going, but that doesn't make it code.

:dizzy: :kookoo:

 

[Jonahdog]

You need energy to keep the "code" running, just like you need electricity to keep computer software "running".
The energy is supplied by God: in Him we live and move and exist - Acts 17:28a

Daytime where you live? See that big shiny thing in the sky? Think about it.

 

[Stripe]

If you define program like that, then DNA isn't a program.

Begging the question is a logical fallacy.

DNA certainly doesn't run like a program, it is just a mass of protein generation happening in parallel with the complex interactions happening away from the DNA.

Software certainly doesn't run like a program, it is just a mass of wires and switches carrying charges with the action happening away from the code.

At best you can say there are recipes for screen outputs and a few logic gates restricting their production.

 

[gcthomas]

Begging the question is a logical fallacy.

Software certainly doesn't run like a program, it is just a mass of wires and switches carrying charges with the action happening away from the code.

At best you can say there are recipes for screen outputs and a few logic gates restricting their production.

Your comments don't even hang together to make logical sense any more. You should keep off the dope, or whatever mental backflips you have to make to hold all the contradictory ideas you think are all true.

Sadly, all you can do is troll. You have nothing to contribute here.

 

[Tambora]

Codes which transmits information requiring action always have an intelligent designer (Braille, Morse, traffic lights, etc). Bill Gates said that DNA is far more sophisticated than any man-made software.
DNA is just one of many, many evidences of our Creator.

:thumb:

 

[Stripe]

Your comments don't even hang together to make logical sense any more. You should keep off the dope, or whatever mental backflips you have to make to hold all the contradictory ideas you think are all true.

Sadly, all you can do is troll. You have nothing to contribute here.

:yawn:

Instead of venting, justify your assertion that DNA is not a code.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Why not make it like that?

If you're such an expert on how to make people, tell us how to do it better.

Meanwhile, your diamonds post was nonsense. Are you going to retract it?

No. It might not have been a perfect analogy, but that doesn't make it retraction worthy. Are you aware of how many of your posts are actual nonsense? How many threads have you had to close down because you got taken to school and were embarrassed? 9? 10?

Are you ever going to tell me why no extant mammals are ever found below the KT boundary? You've been dodging for a while now, so I might as well bring it up here too

 

[Stripe]

No. It might not have been a perfect analogy, but that doesn't make it retraction worthy.

It wasn't an analogy; it was an attempt at a counterexample.

Are you aware of how many of your posts are actual nonsense?

:yawn:

How many threads have you had to close down because you got taken to school and were embarrassed? 9? 10?

None.

Are you ever going to tell me why no extant mammals are ever found below the KT boundary? You've been dodging for a while now, so I might as well bring it up here too

:troll:

 

[Greg Jennings]

It wasn't an analogy; it was an attempt at a counterexample.

Ok I can agree to that

:yawn:

None.



:troll:

Ok so you can't answer my question, which is an admission of defeat. Thank you

Now on to your thread ownership business: So you're just openly lying now? You never had your own thread shut down bc you made a claim that was shown to be false?

I know you have, bc I was the one who caught you one of those times.


But keep lying for Christ, I guess