Login

Join for Free!
118343 members


coevolution of the genetic code

Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.

Moderator: BioTeam

reducible complexity

Postby Roland Pohlmeyer » Tue Nov 20, 2007 3:51 pm

By the way, this perspective lets the code appear so simple/ logical that it is well-conceivable that the code evolved on its own without the interference from an intelligent designer. Sorry creationists, but I think that unless you see God and the universe as one or you place the act of creation before the Big Bang, input from an intelligent designer becomes more and more limited as we humans get to understand more and more about the universe.
Roland Pohlmeyer
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:37 pm

Postby alextemplet » Tue Nov 20, 2007 4:06 pm

How did this thread turn into another ID debate?

Are we a bunch of crack addicts here? We have to debate ID or else we go into withdrawal?
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count
User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)

ignore the id

Postby Roland Pohlmeyer » Wed Nov 21, 2007 1:23 pm

Sorry, I didn't mean to turn this into another debate about ID. I just thought that this simplification of the genetic code could be interpreted this way, and that I should make my position clear. It seemed to me that the postulate of irreducible complexity was something that I should address as a biologist. It was a bit silly of me and I would like to apologise to anyone who is fed up with this debate.
Roland Pohlmeyer
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:37 pm


Postby alextemplet » Wed Nov 21, 2007 5:37 pm

There's no need to apologize; I was just a bit surprised to see that come out of the blue. And if I may be allowed to comment, perhaps the fact that you felt it so necessary to address the ID issue (especially in the language that you chose to address it with) may reveal that you are just as obsessed with a pro-evolution crusade as they are with their anti-evolution crusade. Just a thought.

You're new here so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. Those of us who have been around for a while can tell you that there's almost a new ID thread in here every week. It gets tiring after a while, debating the same topic again and again and again. It's nice to be able to finally discuss evolution and/or genetics simply for its own sake, and not having to turn it into another debate.
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count
User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
 
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)

Re: coevolution of the genetic code

Postby Roland Pohlmeyer » Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:51 pm

PS: The genetic code represented in a circular fashion following 2-1-3 rules and applying the AGCU motif has been published in the Journal of Theoretical Biology. (Please quote: Pohlmeyer R. The genetic code revisited. J Theor Biol. 2008 Aug 7;253(3):623-4. Epub 2008 May 1.)
Roland Pohlmeyer
Garter
Garter
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2007 7:37 pm

Previous

Return to Evolution

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest