Friday, May 07, 2010

God and DNA

I have just read what I believe is the best rational/logical argument for the existence of God:

(1) DNA is not merely a molecule with a pattern; it is a code, a language, and an information storage mechanism.

(2) All codes we know the origin of are created by a conscious mind.

(3) Therefore DNA was designed by a mind, and language and information are proof of the action of a Superintelligence.

I can't find anything wrong with this logically. If everything (little) I know about DNA is true.

The author makes the distinction between patterns, which can occur randomly and naturally, and CODE which carries information via symbols (language), which requires intelligence and intent.

I shared it with an engineer friend of mine last night who is, at best, an agnostic, and is very intelligent, fair and honest...and his reaction was to stare blankly at me for a moment and say, "Wow, I have to think about that."

He'd never heard that argument either.

For more information on this, see:  If You Can Read This, I Can Prove God Exists.

So, is it possible the "Divine Language" is not hidden in the Bible or any other mystic tome...but in life itself?

How perfectly fitting.

The Gunslinger

12 comments:

  1. DNA, with its chemical messenger system is actually quite a bit more than the author describes, but it is truly amazing stuff, either created by God, gosh (god of serendipitous happenstance) or goop (god of outlandish probability. I vote for God!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I just finished listening to the entire presentation. It was very well done. Now for some questions.

    Is the tail bone going (disappearing) or coming (new mutation)? It does serve a purpose, but which way is it evolving, if at all?

    Why do so many people working on SETI, listening for messages from space, believe they can tell the difference between a deliberately "intelligent" message or a randomly created "intelligent" message? What is their criteria for proof of an intelligent source, and why is that any different from DNA?

    Where are all the transitional species today? There should be scads of them considering how long evolution has had to work. At least one cockroach should be changing into something fury, cute and useful.

    Just some random thoughts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. In other,more simplistic terms...I remember a debate re:Big Bang Theory..."So...who/what caused the Big Bang in the first place?" On another note,I recently watched a well-done documentary called "Breaking the Mayan Code".All the while,while entertained, I kept thinking..."There's a LOT of suppositioning here from these 'code-breakers'.What baggage/pre-conditions are they bringing to their theories?" We search,we stumble...

    ReplyDelete
  4. "Where are all the transitional species today?"

    Maybe WE are the transitional species today!

    I think the cockroach is the species least in need of evolution. They are almost the perfect survivor already. It's all about "survival of the fittest, Tru...not the cute and furriest! :-)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yeah, TJ...and they bad mouth "believers" while almost their entire edifice is built on "faith" and incorporeal assumptions and coincidences...the atheist equivalent of angels and miracles.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I can tell you one thing for certain...the wolves are evolving.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Well, Yabu....that made me smile...*howl*

    ReplyDelete
  8. Obama is a big, ugly jigaboo8/5/10 11:48 PM

    i believe in hobbits.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I dream of a white america8/5/10 11:50 PM

    Those of us down at the local KKK chapter love your blog, Gunny!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Yabu is spot on, 'slinger. *howl* indeed. -- Skiri'ki

    ReplyDelete
  11. Gunny - when I first read some of the information on how DNA is coded, it made my jaw drop. It's essentially what's called Forward Error Correction, FEC, in communications theory (my background is similar to the presenter's). There's redundancy in how the information is stored in DNA, so that information is not lost between generations. Unused DNA? Perhaps it's Cyclic Redundancy Checks and other error checking.

    Now it's one thing to think that DNA arose by its own by "stupid accident" - it's quite another to think that the language and the means to transmit the language error free also were both invented by stupid accident. Seems to me it takes a lot of faith to believe that!

    I think it was James Watson himself, one of the co-discoverers of DNA's structure, who calculated that the Universe is not old enough for a structure with the complexity of DNA to arise by random event. This kind of calculation has to be based on a ton of assumptions, and I don't know what his are. But it kinda makes you pause and think.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Graybeard...the argument just keeps getting better and better, the more informed I get.

    Thanks for this!

    ReplyDelete