Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Koonin on transition from the RNA world

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #76
    Originally posted by DaveB View Post

    As expected, no response.

    There is no constraint to a rna sequence.

    Your objection is baseless.
    Lack of a scientific background is grossly apparent. Natural Laws and natural process constrain the outcome of all natural cause and effect event outcomes.

    Just as the water-water bonds when snow flakes form can only form in a limited number of ways restrained by Natural Laws and natural processes, therefore all snow flakes will be snow flakes, but no two snow flakes will be the same. The probability no two 'individual snow flakes being alike are very very low low, but given the ideal environment (constrained by Natural Laws and natural processes) all snow flakes will be snow flakes with a probability of one..
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-28-2020, 10:52 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

      Lack of a scientific background is grossly apparent. Natural Laws and natural process constrain the outcome of all natural cause and effect event outcomes.

      Just as the water-water bonds when snow flakes form can only form in a limited number of ways restrained by Natural Laws and natural processes, therefore all snow flakes will be snow flakes, but no two snow flakes will be the same. The probability no two 'individual snow flakes being alike are very very low low, but given the ideal environment (constrained by Natural Laws and natural processes) all snow flakes will be snow flakes with a probability of one..
      I see that reading comprehension is not your strength.

      I'm not talking about the constraint on snowflakes.

      I'm saying that there is no constraint on rna sequence.

      Comment


      • #78
        Originally posted by DaveB View Post

        I see that reading comprehension is not your strength.

        I'm not talking about the constraint on snowflakes.

        I'm saying that there is no constraint on rna sequence.
        Lack of a scientific background is grossly apparent. Natural Laws and natural process as with all of nature are constrained in the outcome of all natural cause and effect event outcomes.

        No reading comprehension problem. I gave the snow flake formation as an example, which reflects an oft use by ID, which does not work.

        As with all of the nature of our physical existence Natutal Laws and natural process as with all of the natural cause and effect events constrain the outcome including the steps concerning rna sequence.

        Can you provide a reference converning the 'ma sequence' or any other natural cause and effect outcome that is not constrained by Natural Laws and natural processes?
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

          Lack of a scientific background is grossly apparent. Natural Laws and natural process as with all of nature are constrained in the outcome of all natural cause and effect event outcomes.

          No reading comprehension problem. I gave the snow flake formation as an example, which reflects an oft use by ID, which does not work.
          IF ID uses the snowflake as an example, it is not to say that it is similar to DNA/RNA, it is to say that they are not similar.

          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

          As with all of the nature of our physical existence Natutal Laws and natural process as with all of the natural cause and effect events constrain the outcome including the steps concerning rna sequence.
          Life works by natural processes, yes, but natural processes to not determine or constrain the sequence of RNA in the (RNA world (pre-DNA) scenario).

          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
          Can you provide a reference converning the 'ma sequence' or any other natural cause and effect outcome that is not constrained by Natural Laws and natural processes?

          http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...c/gencode.html
          The sequence of bases in DNA operates as a true code in that it contains the information necessary to build a protein expressed in a four-letter alphabet of bases which is transcribed to mRNA and then translated to the twenty-amino-acid alphabet necessary to build the protein. Saying that it is a true code involves the idea that the code is free and unconstrained; any of the four bases can be placed in any of the positions in the sequence of bases. Their sequence is not determined by the chemical bonding. There are hydrogen bonds between the base pairs and each base is bonded to the sugar phosphate backbone, but there are no bonds along the longitudional axis of DNA. The bases occur in the complementary base pairs A-T and G-C, but along the sequence on one side the bases can occur in any order, like the letters of a language used to compose words and sentences.
          To further illustrate what is meant by a true code, consider the magnetic letters fixed to the magnetic board at right. The letters are held to the board by the magnetic forces, but those forces do not impose any specific ordering of the letters. The letters can be arranged to spell out a meaningful message in the English language (code) or to form a meaningless sequence like the one at bottom.



          You keep repeating different forms of "natural cause and effect outcomes" as if it were a mantra. What are they and how do they cause/determine/constrain/inpose the sequence of bases in an RNA string?

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by DaveB View Post

            IF ID uses the snowflake as an example, it is not to say that it is similar to DNA/RNA, it is to say that they are not similar.



            Life works by natural processes, yes, but natural processes to not determine or constrain the sequence of RNA in the (RNA world (pre-DNA) scenario).




            http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...c/gencode.html
            The sequence of bases in DNA operates as a true code in that it contains the information necessary to build a protein expressed in a four-letter alphabet of bases which is transcribed to mRNA and then translated to the twenty-amino-acid alphabet necessary to build the protein. Saying that it is a true code involves the idea that the code is free and unconstrained; any of the four bases can be placed in any of the positions in the sequence of bases. Their sequence is not determined by the chemical bonding. There are hydrogen bonds between the base pairs and each base is bonded to the sugar phosphate backbone, but there are no bonds along the longitudional axis of DNA. The bases occur in the complementary base pairs A-T and G-C, but along the sequence on one side the bases can occur in any order, like the letters of a language used to compose words and sentences.
            To further illustrate what is meant by a true code, consider the magnetic letters fixed to the magnetic board at right. The letters are held to the board by the magnetic forces, but those forces do not impose any specific ordering of the letters. The letters can be arranged to spell out a meaningful message in the English language (code) or to form a meaningless sequence like the one at bottom.



            You keep repeating different forms of "natural cause and effect outcomes" as if it were a mantra. What are they and how do they cause/determine/constrain the sequence of bases in an RNA string?
            It still stands. Note in your reference is that it is constrained by the limits of the four bases involved, and only the resulting combinations that are survivable in the environment required for life will succeed. Yes, only the successful outcomes pass on and all outcomes are ultimately constrained by Natural Laws and natural processes.
            Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-28-2020, 03:15 PM.
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • #81
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

              It still stands. Note in your reference is that it is constrained by the limits of the four bases involved, and only the resulting combinations that are survivable in the environment required for life will succeed. Yes, only the successful outcomes pass on and all outcomes are ultimately constrained by Natural Laws and natural processes.
              No, it doesn't.

              I agree with what you wrote, but you are basically saying what I said in my first post (which is a fundamental ID argument):

              ID also does not require that a RNA replication/translation system (in Koonin's example in the OP) arise instantly. It's obvious though, that the sequence must be functional for any hope of selection to occur.



              The constraint of functionality (survivability) only applies to selection. It happens after a functional sequence has been found out of all possible sequences.

              For you to object to Koonin's probability calculation, you need a constraint that only allows certain sequences of bases to form in the first place.

              Comment


              • #82
                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                Originally posted by lee_merrill
                But he takes into account what we know of the rate of average planet formation.
                Rates and numbers of thing do not represent taking into consideration the Laws of Nature, and natural processes that are the cause of how planets form and the chemistry of life..
                Flat denials will get you nowhere, he does take into account what we know of the rate of average planet formation, and gives an overestimate in order to make a conservative calculation.

                Source: Koonin

                An O-region contains 1022 stars, and every tenth star has a habitable planet; hence, 1021 habitable planets (undoubtedly, a gross overestimation because, in reality, most stars have no planets, let alone habitable ones).

                © Copyright Original Source



                Blessings,
                Lee
                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                  Flat denials will get you nowhere, he does take into account what we know of the rate of average planet formation, and gives an overestimate in order to make a conservative calculation.

                  Source: Koonin

                  An O-region contains 1022 stars, and every tenth star has a habitable planet; hence, 1021 habitable planets (undoubtedly, a gross overestimation because, in reality, most stars have no planets, let alone habitable ones).

                  © Copyright Original Source



                  Blessings,
                  Lee
                  Horrendous unethical dishonest calculations of probability has already been demonstrated in spades.

                  Again, just counting stars says nothing about the Natural Laws and natural processes that determine the factors that constrain the type an number of stars.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    Horrendous unethical dishonest calculations of probability has already been demonstrated in spades.
                    Claiming victory does not count as an argument.

                    Again, just counting stars says nothing about the Natural Laws and natural processes that determine the factors that constrain the type an number of stars.
                    On the contrary, counting stars and estimating the number of planets does take into account natural laws and processes. Are you saying he's just making numbers up?

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      Claiming victory does not count as an argument.
                      Victory is not the question. The question is the unethical and dishonest use of probability to justify a religious agenda, which is not science.

                      On the contrary, counting stars and estimating the number of planets does take into account natural laws and processes. Are you saying he's just making numbers up?

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      No it does not, math is a tool of science and not science. Counting stars says nothing about the Natural Laws, natural processes and the environment that determine the outcomes of cause and effect events for stars and planets to form. This is just a fact of science.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                        Counting stars says nothing about the Natural Laws, natural processes and the environment that determine the outcomes of cause and effect events for stars and planets to form. This is just a fact of science.
                        Estimating the number of stars uses the principle of uniformity of natural laws to extrapolate from the stars we do count. And estimating the number of planets requires knowledge of the rate of planet formation.

                        Blessings,
                        Lee
                        "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                        Comment


                        • #87
                          Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                          Estimating the number of stars uses the principle of uniformity of natural laws to extrapolate from the stars we do count. And estimating the number of planets requires knowledge of the rate of planet formation.

                          Blessings,
                          Lee
                          This is simply counting and estimating the number of stars and says nothing about the Natural Laws and natural processes that determine which stars and planets form.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #88
                            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                            This is simply counting and estimating the number of stars and says nothing about the Natural Laws and natural processes that determine which stars and planets form.
                            Simply repeating your statement is not appropriate, here again is my response: Estimating the number of stars uses the principle of uniformity of natural laws to extrapolate from the stars we do count. And estimating the number of planets requires knowledge of the rate of planet formation.

                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                            Comment


                            • #89
                              Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                              Simply repeating your statement is not appropriate, here again is my response: Estimating the number of stars uses the principle of uniformity of natural laws to extrapolate from the stars we do count. And estimating the number of planets requires knowledge of the rate of planet formation.

                              Blessings,
                              Lee
                              Simply repeating your statements is not appropriate,

                              No it does not require knowledge of planet formation it only requires counting different types of stars.

                              Absolutely nothing in the literature cited directly describes the Natural Laws nor natural processes as factors in the calculation of the probabilities.

                              I asked for this before and you have failed to provide references to answer the question.
                              Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-31-2020, 03:42 PM.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • #90
                                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                                Simply repeating your statements is not appropriate,

                                No it does not require knowledge of planet formation it only requires counting different types of stars.

                                Absolutely nothing in the literature cited directly describes the Natural Laws nor natural processes as factors in the calculation of the probabilities.

                                I asked for this before and you have failed to provide references to answer the question.
                                I am repeating my reply because you are simply repeating your statement, to which I reply as follows: Estimating the number of stars uses the principle of uniformity of natural laws to extrapolate from the stars we do count. And estimating the number of planets requires knowledge of the rate of planet formation.

                                Blessings,
                                Lee
                                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                135 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                46 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X