frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


Communities




DNA: Intelligent Design Or Random Pattern?

Debate Information


Famously, Bill Gates said, "DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.“  Is he right?  Is DNA so complex it could not have been produced randomly?  Is it evidence of the existence of God?
dna.jpg 13.5K



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
22%
Margin

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    Argument Topic: Not DNA, But The Genetic Code

    Complex structures like DNA are not a problem for science to explain. I'm unsure whether you might be getting confused about a similar argument, so I'll elaborate a little.

    What science can't explain (at least not yet) is the existence of the genetic code, which is the set of mathematical instructions by which all known forms of biology are governed. The problem for science is that all other known examples of codes have been invented by human intelligence. Nature has no apparent cause to encode information so that it is only visible to -- or interpretable by -- a specific third party or mechanical process, because that strongly implies intent, which nature does not have. It implies that nature wants X to have access to the information, but not Y. 

    Being an atheist (or at least an agnostic), this argument has troubled me for the better part of a decade. I see no reasonable way around it. While it definitely does not imply a religious aspect to biological life as we know it, what it does appear to suggest is that the rules for building life were designed. Of course, it is possible that science is missing something and there's some other way to explain it, but if so then that is not known at the moment. When people mock theories of intelligent design they are usually not aware of the potentially profound implications the genetic code has on the playing field.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4891 Pts   -  
    JulesKorngold said:

    Famously, Bill Gates said, "DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.“  Is he right?  Is DNA so complex it could not have been produced randomly?  Is it evidence of the existence of God?
    Bill Gates is right, of course. His statement, however, does not assume that "it could not have been produced randomly", let alone that some supernatural creature created it.

    "Randomly" is a funny word too: from a certain perspective nothing in the Universe is random, and the concept of randomness is merely human conceptualization of certain relationships between events in the Universe marked by lack of sufficient information for predictability. The outcome of a coin toss is not random: it is determined by laws of physics, by the way the coin was tossed, by the way the wind blows, by the air resistance... Were we to measure all these factors accurately enough, we would be able to predict with incredible precision the outcome of the toss - however, in practice this is impossible, so we have to "collapse" all those factors into a bunch of grey goo and use simpler symmetry-based methods to quantify the relative likelihood of expected outcomes.

    DNA was not produced "randomly" in the absolute sense, even if in practice the exact way in which it was produced will never be determined, and, in fact, might be metaphysically indeterminable.
  • dallased25dallased25 379 Pts   -  
    Anyone who says "random" when it comes to genetics or DNA or evolution, just simply don't understand what Natural selection means. While it is true there mutations are indeed random and occur naturally and regularly...the survival of them is completely non random. So in the sense that DNA "appears designed by an intelligence" is in appearance only and only if you ignore large parts of it. Our DNA, includes things like Endogenous Retro Viruses, Pseudogenes and can carry on bad inherited things like being prone to cancer, or heart disease, etc. So our DNA appears exactly as it should if the process has elements of randomness, but with the survival of the most beneficial traits being there. You get good, bad and neutral genes, which is exactly what'd you'd expect out of natural selection and random mutation. We are "designed" by natural processes. If there is a "designer", then that designer must necessarily be flawed as well since our DNA is full of flaws, sometimes goes wrong and has so much useless DNA (they are actually remnants of our evolutionary history, but serve no current purpose). Of...this "designer" designs us flawed on purpose...which inflicts suffering on millions every single year...which if that's the case, then this "designer" is a bit of a sicko. 
    OakTownASkepticalOne
  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -  
    False dichotomy. DNA is about as random as water. It's all chemical interactions. It bugs me when people refer to DNA as a "code" because it implies a creator. DNA is a long chain nucleotide. It's a chemical; a big chemical, but a chemical none the less. Saying DNA is a code is like saying H2O is the code for water. Scientists have observed the spontaneous generation of nucleotides and amino acids on multiple occasions, so we know they can form naturally.



    SkepticalOneNomenclature
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @OakTownA
    It bugs me when people refer to DNA as a "code" because it implies a creator.

    With due respect I think you might be confusing DNA with the genetic code. The genetic code is a code. DNA isn't a code.

  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -  
    Most of the time I've seen DNA referred to as the "genetic code." I'm not sure what else it would be referring to. Even still, if we are talking about genes, they are still chemicals, and not a code, unless H2O is the code for water.
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @OakTownA
    Most of the time I've seen DNA referred to as the "genetic code."

    It's a very common error, I'm afraid. They're two completely different things. DNA is a polymer (i.e. a string of molecules) and the genetic code refers to the set of instructions used to build proteins.

    Genetic code refers to the instructions contained in a gene that tell a cell how to make a specific protein. Each gene’s code uses the four nucleotide bases of DNA: adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G) and thymine (T) — in various ways to spell out three-letter “codons” that specify which amino acid is needed at each position within a protein.

    https://www.genome.gov/genetics-glossary/Genetic-Code

  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -  
    "Genetic code refers to the instructions contained in a gene that tell a cell how to make a specific protein. Each gene’s code uses the four nucleotide bases of DNA: adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G) and thymine (T) — in various ways to spell out three-letter “codons” that specify which amino acid is needed at each position within a protein."
    Which comes from DNA. DNA is made up of genes, and this does nothing to counter my point. The "instructions contained" are chemicals. If DNA/genetics is a code, then H2O is the "code" for water.

    Nomenclature
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @OakTownA

    Which comes from DNA. DNA is made up of genes, and this does nothing to counter my point. 

    Forgive me, but you didn't have a point. You confused DNA with the genetic code. I explained your mistake, illustrated the difference to you, and yet you are still arguing with me. Why?

  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -  
    What do you think DNA is?  I replied because you missed my point. If DNA/genes are a code, then all chemical compounds/molecules are also a code. Is H2O a code?
    NomenclatureSkepticalOne
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @OakTownA

    I think I've identified the problem. You can't read English, can you?
  • OakTownA said:
    What do you think DNA is?  I replied because you missed my point. If DNA/genes are a code, then all chemical compounds/molecules are also a code. Is H2O a code?
    I have to say, I don't see the distinction @Nomenclature is trying to make between DNA and the genetic code. 
    NomenclatureOakTownA
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne
    I have to say, I don't see the distinction @Nomenclature is trying to make between DNA and the genetic code.

    Well, how about simply looking it up and educating yourself? 

    DNA is physical. The genetic code is abstract. They're two completely different things. If you want a better explanation, consult a geneticist.

  • @SkepticalOne
    I have to say, I don't see the distinction @Nomenclature is trying to make between DNA and the genetic code.

    Well, how about simply looking it up and educating yourself? 

    genetic code - the sequence of nucleotides in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and ribonucleic acid (RNA) that determines the amino acid sequence of proteins. 

    https://www.britannica.com/science/genetic-code


    Nomenclature
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -   edited January 19
    "I think I've identified the problem. You can't read English, can you?"
    I can read, but you can't seem to answer a question:
    What do you think DNA is?

    Also, it STILL dose not change my point that DNA is chemicals. If DNA is a code, then H2O is the "code" for water.

    "DNA is physical. The genetic code is abstract. They're two completely different things. If you want a better explanation, consult a geneticist."
    Ah, I think I understand your problem. The "genetic code" is a series of rules that we have observed regarding DNA, kind of like Bolye's Law. It describes things like which codons create which proteins, which codons indicate the beginning and end of a protein chain, etc. It is no more abstract than any other law in chemistry. Below is a link to codon tables, if you are curious. I'm not a geneticist, but I do have a minor in biology.

    SkepticalOne
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne
    genetic code - the sequence of nucleotides in deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and ribonucleic acid (RNA) that determines the amino acid sequence of proteins. 

    I don't quite know how to react to this, given that the sentence you have quoted makes it perfectly clear that the genetic code is not the same thing as DNA. How many times, and how simply, must the same thing be explained to you before it registers upstairs? DNA is something which physically exists in the real world. If you are ever charged with a crime, the police will swab your mouth in order to obtain your physical DNA. The genetic code is a set of mathematical instructions which does not physically exist in the real world. Nobody swabs your mouth for your genetic code. When you take a paternity test, that's a DNA test, not a genetic code test.

    Why is this so difficult for you to understand? It's extremely simple:-

    Genetic code is a set of rules which lead to a translation of information kept in the sequence of DNA on to the sequence of proteins. Genetic code is based on the three-base long codons which code for different amino acids. Genetic material, on the other hand, is the DNA itself present in our cells.

    https://www.mytutor.co.uk/answers/27839/A-Level/Biology/What-s-the-difference-between-genetic-code-genetic-material-and-genetic-information/

    Christ almighty.

    SkepticalOne
  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -  
    Did you even read my comment?
    "Ah, I think I understand your problem. The "genetic code" is a series of rules that we have observed regarding DNA, kind of like Bolye's Law. It describes things like which codons create which proteins, which codons indicate the beginning and end of a protein chain, etc. It is no more abstract than any other law in chemistry. Below is a link to codon tables, if you are curious. I'm not a geneticist, but I do have a minor in biology."
    Unlike Boyle's Law, it is not mathematical; it's more like a cypher, where three base pairs "code" for an amino acid. It is not abstract; we know which pairs code for which amino acids.
    Here is a basic chart that demonstrates which pairs code for which amino acids:
    1st
    base
    2nd base 3rd
    base
    U C A G
    U UUU (Phe/F) Phenylalanine Up-arrow UCU (Ser/S) Serine dagger UAU (Tyr/Y) Tyrosine dagger UGU (Cys/C) Cysteine dagger U
    UUC UCC UAC UGC C
    UUA (Leu/L) Leucine Up-arrow UCA UAA Stop (Ochre) *[note 2] UGA Stop (Opal) *[note 2] A
    UUG UCG UAG Stop (Amber) *[note 2] UGG (Trp/W) Tryptophan Up-arrow G
    C CUU CCU (Pro/P) Proline Up-arrow CAU (His/H) Histidine double-dagger CGU (Arg/R) Arginine double-dagger U
    CUC CCC CAC CGC C
    CUA CCA CAA (Gln/Q) Glutamine dagger CGA A
    CUG CCG CAG CGG G
    A AUU (Ile/I) Isoleucine Up-arrow ACU (Thr/T) Threonine dagger AAU (Asn/N) Asparagine dagger AGU (Ser/S) Serine dagger U
    AUC ACC AAC AGC C
    AUA ACA AAA (Lys/K) Lysine double-dagger AGA (Arg/R) Arginine double-dagger A
    AUG (Met/M) Methionine Up-arrow ACG AAG AGG G
    G GUU (Val/V) Valine Up-arrow GCU (Ala/A) Alanine Up-arrow GAU (Asp/D) Aspartic acid GGU (Gly/G) Glycine Up-arrow U
    GUC GCC GAC GGC C
    GUA GCA GAA (Glu/E) Glutamic acid GGA A
    GUG GCG GAG GGG G
    And for the THIRD time, what the genetic code IS does not affect my point. DNA, genes, chromosomes, etc are all chemicals and not specially created.




  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @OakTownA
    Did you even read my comment?

    Nope. Why would I read your comments? I proved you objectively wrong two days ago and you're still trying to argue with me. I explained to you exactly how and why you were wrong and it only encouraged you to keep arguing. If you're not going to respect me, yourself, or the rules of debate, I don't have any time for you I'm afraid.

  • OakTownAOakTownA 419 Pts   -  
    Well, that's your loss, as I realized we agree, but were talking around each other. I also took the time to correct some of you mistaken ideas around the genetic code, like it's theoretical or mathematical. It's unfortunate that you are not willing to entertain the idea that you might be incorrect, or partially correct. Personally, I come to a site like this so that my ideas will be challenged. If you are not willing or wanting to participate in an exchange of ideas, why are you on a debate site?
    Nomenclature
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 805 Pts   -  
    @OakTownA
    Well, that's your loss

    Cool.

    as I realized we agree

    We don't agree. You thought that DNA and the genetic code are the same thing. I explained to you that they aren't. 

    I also took the time to correct some of you mistaken ideas around the genetic code

    You are very literally delusional.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch