Because there are those who are Science ONLY people out there that say if it is not material it does not exist.
That believe everything that is not material, is then immaterial.
That limits what they are willing to believe since they believe that the only drive that a human has is the drive to see their genes survive. Anything else does not fit their model and is therefore denied and excoriated.
Minor things like feelings and consciousness do not really exist, but are falsely believed without reason. RIGHT.
grace2u
2007-12-17 03:05:09
·
answer #1
·
answered by Theophilus 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Considering the majority of it is essentially 'random' data - damaged genes, deactivated retro-viral insertions, benign mutations, randomly generated 'junk that serves little purpose - I'd say yes. By comparing DNA with other organisms in evolutionary trees we can see how it IS a matter of trial and error for life. And we can see how comprimises are made in exchange for other benefits.
As for you claim that there is more 'information' than the Encyclopedia Britannica, that's like comparing a Christmas card to a book on World War II - completely different subject matter. DNA contains, among the 'junk', codes for protein transcription - several hundreds of thousands.
A more appropriate analogy of DNA is a collection of information built up over several hundred years by several hundred different people. There's gonna be a lot in it but it's not beyond our intelligence or the ability of an organic data storage module as DNA and collection process as natural selection. DNA is like a damaged, but still usable floppy disk (tends to occasionally corrupt data) and natural selection works a bit like the Borg in Star Trek - they can't make things up but when they stumble upon something they make use of it, if it's of use - in natural selection there is no intelligent goal so things cannot be designed but they can 'mutate' randomly and be selected as 'better than current' and used in generations going forward.
Sorry about the extensive answer, I know it's just rambling, just though I'd give a fairly full answer.
2007-12-17 03:53:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
DNA doesn't contain 'information' in the same way that a book written by people contains 'information'
It's written like this
G A C T
C T G A
G always pairs with C
A always pairs with T
because of the nature of isomers T A and A T are not the same, same with G C and C G.
varying combinations of that
so you can have huge 'random' strand of DNA that means all numbers of things.
same with binary, you write a huge random strand of binary and it is bound to mean something.
so yes, if the encyclopedia britannica was only written with 4 letters, maybe you could compare the two.
people seem to forget that chemicals react with each other differently to how the 'macro' level that we operate at reacts.
2007-12-17 02:58:37
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is acceptable to me that it was an acceptable explanation when there were no other explanations. The problem is it stuck around and continued to be THE information. Now that we do have explanations minds have closed to them choosing hope over facts. It is inconceivable to assume that the only history book we need is the Holy Bible where the answer to all of life's questions is God. It is very outdated and scientifically incorrect. I really don't know why it can't just be regarded as a history book. Never underestimate the power of mass reproduction.
2007-12-17 03:05:59
·
answer #4
·
answered by Blame Amy 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know maybe because if people admit that that there is a creator then they would also have to admit they they have someone to answer to for the things that they do. Since they so not want to be held accountable for their actions it is easier for them to deny a creator and fall back on evolution and the idea that humans came into existence by a random working force.
2007-12-17 02:59:49
·
answer #5
·
answered by Bride of Christ 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Organizing it and sending it from space indicates the extraterrestial intelligence exists not the existence of the DNA itself
Back to school for you.
2007-12-17 02:56:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
You call DNA intelligent design? DNA is flawed and so subject to mutations that no intelligent being would take credit for its design. Same with the human eye.
2007-12-17 02:56:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
very simply put, because people would rather do what they believe is right and wrong than to accept the word of God and all of his "commandments" we are to follow and to worship God the way he says to not what we think is best.*Some people just can not deal with the fact that GOD HAS ALL AUTHORITY*
2007-12-18 05:27:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Penny Mae 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
They can't handle the truth.
2007-12-17 02:57:22
·
answer #9
·
answered by papa G 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
They don't know or understand..
2007-12-17 02:56:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by son of God 7
·
0⤊
1⤋