Science & Technology

Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Random or systematic is what makes the difference

If things originated by random chance why is the DNA structure systematic. There are markers that lead and end genes. Random chance would just be hap hazard. And even the most basic bacteria contains 500,000 DNA base pairs. If you compare this to the dictionary which contains about 500,000 words it is not only like throwing the words in the air and having them all land in alphabetical order but also having the index markers in the right places. With or without belief in a Creator this is not a rational belief. Even for atheists with rational thought it seems there would have to be some kind of deliberate catalyst.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

Northwest · M

It’s really simple. What you’re looking at, is the only combination that worked. All tte failed random combinations failed to produce life.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest but how can you even get to this combination. That's the real question. Like I said all the words of the dictionary coming together perfectly and systematically. I can't see with what we now know this being reasonable for a rational thinking person

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts it’s really very simple. Try different random combinations, for hundreds of millions of years, and it will eventually click.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest not likely. Think about a dictionary of all the words in alphabetical order

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts Shuffle all the words in the dictionary, long enough, say over hundreds of millions of years, and eventually you will get it sorted alphabetically.

With DNA, all you need is to hit the jackpot once, and the rest takes care of itself.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest good luck. We all know that would never happen. And remember the DNA sequences are systematic. And this is just a bacteria. 🤣🤣

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts by we all know, you mean you convinced yourself, based on a false understanding of how randomness and chaos work. Good luck? You’re a living proof that random events can create order. And possibly your misunderstanding of how DNA works as a base building block.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest well there are two or more sides and none of us really knows. And odds can always be calculated but not reason

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts really? I thought we all know…

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest some [i]think[/i] they know 🤣

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts So, by [quote]

We all know that would never happen.

[/quote]

Who’s [b][i]all[/i][/b]?

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest the assumption was any reasonable person. Here is an example. When the police give odds in a crime and say it's a 1 in a hundred billion the dna is not a match. But there are only 8 billion people in the world

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts your example is another example of how you don’t know what you don’t know.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest it's a math calculation. At a certain point it's meaningless. Not only is the dna over 3 billion base pairs long but it is just one of many things that have astronomical odds. Well beyond reason. And just to be clear I don't believe it's by supernatural ways. There is some physical manner. A catalyst we don't know about perhaps. But certainly not through the theory of evolution. You may as well believe the earth is the centre of the universe.

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts why would I believe the earth is the center of the universe?

DNA has 3.2 billion base pairs, and while we don’t know exactly how it happened, it is not beyond reason to believe that over 10 billion years, randomness can create a molecule that can reproduce, producing RNA. 4 billion years ago, evolving into the life producing DNA.

As to the thing that made it happen, not much mystery there. Look up the word catalyst. That’s how organic chemistry works.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest I think a belief in a Creator is much more credible than this fairy tale of random evolution. And remember the complexity of the DNA which is equivalent to a book taller than the statue of Liberty is just one part of thousands if not millions to have to systematically come together. But I will clarify that however the Creator did it it is not by magic. It's traceable in the real world through science. But the theory of evolution is not science as they structure and complexity of the cell was unknown at the time

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts [quote]I think a [b][i][u]belief in a Creato[/u][/i][/b]r is much more credible than this [b][i][u]fairy tale[/u][/i][/b] of random evolution. [/quote]

I'm sure you thought this through before you wrote it. 🤣

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest you just don't want to give up on your impossible odds. That's ok. I think it is clear

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts Looks like you did not notice the irony of your statement. I'll highlight it for you, again:

[b]belief in a Creator
fairy tale [/b]

[quote]I think it is clear[/quote]

Far from it.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest you are good at taking things out of context.

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts [quote]you are good at taking things out of context.[/quote]

Shame on me for taking what you said, and using it.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest twisting it. I said the fairy tale is believing it all popped out of nowhere. Systematic and so complex. But honestly I don't think you realize how complex

Northwest · M

@Axeroberts tte irony of your statement, even when pointed out to you, is still going over your head.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@Northwest no it's not. I know many people find religion as a fairy tale. But I already said I am not religious. But if you look at a scale and you think of which side it leans on the random answer comes up short. I am not saying what the real answer is because no one really knows. But certainly when the universe and life all show a systematic function that doesn't line up with being random. Or we would have no universal theories. Random implies hap-hazard. And the physical evidence proves it isn't that way