Posts by Vidqun

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

A ha, wrong. I first got some of the information from here. That is no secret (see previous threads):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35fulERIUnU

The rest of the information I got from two books written by Dr. Werner Gitt, called "In the beginning was information" and "Without Excuse." The books are based on articles he wrote and lectures he gave while appointed Professor and Director at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology (1978). He was head of the Department of Information Technology. His biography states: "He has written numerous scientific papers in the field of information science, numerical mathematics and control engineering." I have a list of his articles and lectures for those that are interested. He would write his technical articles and lectures under the auspices of the German Federal Institute. He actually invites all to disseminate the information on information in the interest of truth.

But thanks for the link to the website. It might come in handy for future reference.

The study of information was his life's work and I believe he knows what he is talking about there. Yes, he's not popular because what he says about information is true and the truth hurts. I don't agree with his theology though. As a Young Earth proponent, he insists that God is above His natural laws and that these do not apply to Him. I, on the other hand believe that God follows His natural laws in creation. This I base on results obtained from archaeology, linguistics, carbon dating and the fossil record.

I have not encountered much refutation of his work on information. I believe it is because his logic is impeccable. Not many want to take him on in his own field of expertise, which was his life's work. I am a linguist at heart and his laws on information make 100% sense. Human language, computer language and DNA "language" do not fall out of the air. In each case it would come from an intelligent source, the first from a human being, the second from a computer programmer and the third arose spontaneously (by spontaneous combustion?) from the activities of basic elements, molecules, gases, electrons and energy (heat from the earth, lightning and sunlight). No, the latter must have come from a very intelligent Creator. Not rocket science at all, I'm sorry you don't see it that way. Because of that, you will have a distinct disadvantage in your life and in your studies.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

Cofty, what I mean "perfect" conditions of a lab environment, i.e., scientist can create any condition they want. Still the recipe of life eludes them. According to what I see and know, I predict they will not get there. They are working on a wrong premise. And yes, as I said before, I also predict that they will not find life on Mars. It's a barren, inhospitable, atmosphereless landscape, not conducive for life at all, and definitely not conducive for life to originate.

A ha, I am sorry to say, those are not my ideas, but those put forward by scientists of a new relatively new science, called Information Science. They were actually formulated by the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology (Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt Braunschweig).

You talk of "uncaused events." Would you be so kind as to name a few. As far as I know, there is no such thing. And is that not the problem with the theory of evolution? Its proponents reason that the origin of life was an accident. It all happened by chance. Not only did it get kickstarted by itself, it developed into a wide variety of magnificent life forms through the process of evolution. Again, there is no such thing. I call it a huge jump of the imagination. Perhaps my problem is that I have no imagination.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

Landy, you're right. Lots of things live there but the question is: Did they start there? Did they then migrate out of there, metamorphosing into a huge array of life forms to populate the earth and sea? It's a long shot and highly improbable according my understanding of life and the living. But for those that want to believe such a myth, be my guest. They are in good company. These myths have been doing the rounds for a long time.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

A ha, I should add, my interpretation of natural laws would differ form yours. It starts with one’s world view. I do not look at them in isolation but fit them into an existing framework. I try to incorporate the laws of physics, chemistry, biochemistry and biology in this framework.

Think of water boiling in a kettle. Will you be concentrating the molecules around the element or dispersing them? It doesn’t matter whether its an open or closed system. Where you have red hot lava boiling sea water, what will happen to the molecules in the sea water?

You don't see a problem with cause and effect, I do. What was the first cause?

As I said before, view the cell as a protein factory. Nucleus (board of directors). RNA (messengers from board of directors). Ribosomes (factory floor). Protein production. Can you see the flow of Universal Information? Nucleus > RNA > Ribosomes > Nucleus.

Remember I said there are five prerequisites of UI. 1) Sender/receiver, emphasis on an intelligent sender. 2) Cosyntics (code + syntax). 3) Semantics; 4) Pragmatics; 5) Apobetics. If one is missing, it doesn’t qualify as UI.

Cofty, hydrothermal vents would be the last place on earth where life would originate. As I said before, it probably one of the most inhospitable places on the planet. Secondly, through diffusion in sea water, free molecules would disperse, rather than aggregate. How would life form under such conditions, if it cannot be kickstarted in “perfect” conditions in a lab? This comes from observation of available evidence.

Biogenesis is the production of new living organisms or organelles. The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the conclusion that complex living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, modern life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation. This is summarized in the phrase Omne vivum ex vivo, Latin for "all life [is] from life." A related statement is Omnis cellula e cellula, "all cells [are] from cells;" this conclusion is one of the central statements of cell theory. I view it as a law because it is unfalsifiable at this stage. If it is proved false, then it should be rejected. As said in prevous threads, no example exists to contradict the law, so it stands.

[The term biogenesis was coined by Henry Charlton Bastian to mean the generation of a life form from nonliving materials, however, Thomas Henry Huxley chose the term abiogeneis and redefined biogenesis for life arising from preexisting life. The generation of life from non-living material is called abiogenesis.] See Wiki.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

Cofty, I don't think a big genome could automatically be correlated with complexity. Whatever the case, I am sure there's a very good reason for it. I'll sleep on it and read up on it tomorrow. The botanists might be able to explain it.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

A ha, so how about the DNA as sender and the organism as recipient of the finished product. I knew you wouldn't like the Creator concept. I should not have suggested it. My bad. The laws of nature, it's late, so here goes:

1) Every action has a reaction (anorganic molecules > organic molecules > living cell). Causality (also referred to as causation, or cause and effect) is the agency or efficacy that connects one process (the cause) with another process or state (the effect), where the first is understood to be partly responsible for the second, and the second is dependent on the first.

2) Law of inert gases: Lowest probability, highest chaos. A gas will not be concentrated in an open environment. "The laws of thermodynamics seem to dictate the opposite, that nature should inexorably degenerate toward a state of greater disorder, greater entropy. Yet all around us we see magnificent structures—galaxies, cells, ecosystems, human beings—that have all somehow managed to assemble themselves.” (Wiki).

3) Diffusing and diluting of atoms and molecules in liquids. If the planet was covered with water to start off with, nowhere would molecules be able to concentrate to form life.

4) Life from life, etc.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

Simon, man is undoubtably the most complex information-processing system on earth. The total number of bits handled daily in all information-processing events occurring in the human body is approximately 3 x 10²⁴. This includes all deliberate as well as all involuntary activities, the former comprising the use of language and the information required for controlling voluntary movements, while the latter includes the control of the internal organs and hormonal systems. The number of bits being processed daily in the human body is more than a million times the total amount of human knowledge stored in all the libraries of the world, which is about 10¹⁸ bits.

Quite a few people are six feet tall. If unravelled the DNA molecule of any cell in one’s body is approximately seven feet long. The information in a single DNA strand is the equivalent of many sets of Encyclopedias. Think about it, the fertilized ovum is the size of a pinhead. That nucleus supplies all the information to construct a person.

That is why the DNA molecule is viewed as an Optimal Coding System:

1) As seen the storage in a living cell must be done within the smallest possible space.

2) As the number of characters of the code increases, the complexity of the execution machinery will have to increase. So the four base pairs are basic, yet their application is quite extraordinary.

3) According to the DNA zipper, the code “alphabet” would be even, the strands being complimentary.

4) In order to reduce errors it is necessary to incorporate redundancy. The significance of redundancy is that it provides flexibility without error, e.g., codons GAA and GAG both specify the aminoacid glutamic acid. Even if GAA is copied ‘incorrectly’ as GAG, it also codes for glutamic acid.

Conclusion: Scientist uses advanced algorithms to predict DNA controlling the genes (to turn them on and off). They also use an information theoretical framework and coding theory to study the DNA repair mechanism, which is viewed as a genomic error correction system. Their proposed framework for DNA-repair enables them to describe this functionality within the DNA molecule quantitatively and algorithmically. Thus, the coding system for living beings is optimal from an engineering standpoint.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

No Cofty, you are mistaken. If one follows the natural laws and the laws of Universal Information you can draw only one conclusion. Language and computer code were compiled or programmed. The DNA, much more complicated than all languages or computer programs put together, would follow the path of Universal Information. I see enough evidence there to be convincing. Are above laws falsifiable? I will be holding on to them, until such time when they are proved false.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

A ha, bear with me, I know you believe differently, but the will or volition will have to come from the one who created the cell nucleus. The cell nucleus cannot develop on its own from inanimate matter. It has to be created. It was designed for a specific purpose.

The cell nucleus includes different kinds of information: 1) structural; 2) operational; 3) communicative. All three types could be classified as Universal Information or UI in short.

Universal Information(UI) should be distinguished from commonplace information. UI must conform to certain criteria. It must incorporate:

Cosyntics (code + syntax): This is all structural units and properties used in the process of creating information. A code is a uniquely defined set of abstract symbols. Syntax is a set of all the rules in a language, whether or not that language is natural, machine, logic or mathematic.

Symantics (meaning): This refers to the meaning that has been assigned to words, phrases, sentences, thus the practical application of code and syntax. This cannot originate from random, unguided physical-chemical processes and needs an intelligent sender.

Pragmatics (action taken): This allows the receiver of the information to perform certain actions. What the sender hopes to achieve and/or what the receiver needs to perform.

Apobetics (purpose) The means of attaining a purpose.

If you compare human language, computer language and DNA with above criteria, you will notice that all of these qualify as Universal Information (UI).

E.g., If you look through a microscope at a crystal lattice, you gather in a lot of information, but this does not qualify as UI. Your example of the tree rings also presents you with a lot of information, but this does not qualify as UI either. If you look at the stars through a telescope a lot of information is presented to you, but it does not qualify as UI.

Universal information, as human language or computer code, needs an intelligent compiler or programmer. So also the DNA code in living cells needs a compiler and programmer.

113

I am deeply ashamed that I didn't accept evolution until a few years ago...

by ILoveTTATT2 in

jw
friends

so... i live in mexico and i am helping with an esl class (english as a second language).

actually, i am helping with two classes.

i get two days a week in which i just stand there and have a debate with the class, encouraging as many as possible to just talk... in english.. anyways, i like talking about subjects that generate debate.

Vidqun

Cofty: One other thing. You asked about how genes can explain radical differences in body plans.
The answer is homeobox genes.
I don't think I have ever explained about the homeobox. Perhaps I will do that in the "Evolution is a Fact" series.

I can't wait for your discussion on Homeobox and Hox genes, a fascinating subject indeed. There’s wonderful illustrations of the subject to drive the points home. I can actually see why you haven't done it yet. It's quite problematical for evolutionists. See the following quote:

“Control genes like homeotic genes may be the target of mutations that would conceivably change phenotypes, but one must remember that, the more central one makes changes in a complex system, the more severe the peripheral consequences become. … Homeotic changes induced in Drosophila genes have led only to monstrosities, and most experimenters do not expect to see a bee arise from their Drosophila constructs.” (C. Schwabe, Theoretical limitations of molecular phylogenetics and the evolution of relaxins, Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology107B:167–177, 1994).