Sunday, May 31, 2015

About That Central Dogma

Let’s just call it The Dogma

Remember when evolutionists stated that information flow proceeds from DNA to RNA to proteins? They called it the “Central Dogma” and they envisioned DNA mutations providing the fuel for natural selection to create the species. Then there was reverse transcriptase, a protein machine that inserted RNA into DNA. And then there was alternative splicing where protein machines rearranged RNA. And there was RNA editing, where proteins modify single nucleotides by removing an amine group. After such deamination the nucleotide is interpreted differently at the ribosome in the translation process which constructs proteins. For example when adenosine is deaminated, it instead looks like guanosine at the ribosome. And while RNA editing was thought to be rare, new research finds that it is massive in the common squid, Doryteuthis pealeiirecodes. In fact the RNA copies of more than half of the squid’s genes undergo RNA editing.

All of this reveals that the simplistic Central Dogma is not actually central to biology. It is not even true. All evolutionists are left with is the dogma.

13 comments:

  1. It's true that for some time the paradigm was " one gene -> one enzyme".
    But that was 70 years ago with Beadles and Tatum. Now with advanced molecular genetic techniques scientists know that the picture is far from simple.

    I guess genetics is moving so fast now that Mr Hunter can't keep up. He has to dig up old concepts that are taught as history in first year of university to create strawmen he can beat down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Genetics is refuting evolutionism. It's just that evolutionists are too stupid to realize it.

      Delete
  2. It is obvious to any rational person that it is impossible for a system so complex to have arisen by random forces, however you define evolution at the moment. There is no way in 14 billion years that even part of this complex machinery could have come together. The only way someone could believe in evolution is if they are religiously motivated to be blind to the obvious, and distort the facts to their own irrational ends.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So what are those religious motive you are talking about ?
      I always thought is was some christians trying to undermine the theory of evolution so their belief won't be hurt.

      Delete
    2. I always thought is was some christians trying to undermine the theory of evolution so their belief won't be hurt.

      Can you give some examples?

      So what are those religious motive you are talking about ?

      It’s all about religion.

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2014/09/evolution-professor-every-year-i-give.html

      http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-jerry-coyne-liar-or-just-in-denial.html

      Delete
    3. I include atheism as a religious belief. It is a belief that there is no god - it is a belief in the subject of religion. For example, it is not a belief about mathematics, biology, there is an overlap in philosophy of religion. Atheism is a negative conclusion in the field of religion. Therefore it is a religious statement.

      Delete
  3. Can you give some examples You Mr Hunter are a fellow of the discovery institute, which mission is to advance the theistic foundations of the West among others.
    Most of the financing of the discovery institute comes from wealthy evangelical christians :

    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/21/us/politicized-scholars-put-evolution-on-the-defensive.html

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A32444-2005Mar13.html

    More over there is no evolution religion. There is multiple fields that study evolution, from population genetics to conservation that advance the body of knowledge of science.

    Most of the articles cited here are written by individuals accepting evolution. When will there be some real research done by ID that could be discussed here ? Is there even any consensus on what ID is, or even who or what is the designer ?

    Even the guys at answersingenesis.org/ dismiss ID, prefering its former iteration, creationism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Calamity:

      Sorry, I'm not a very good example. My belief isn't "hurt" by evolution.

      Delete
    2. Then your organisation is ? You are being paid by discovery institute to challenge evolution theory by publishing in this blog.
      So if you are denunciating evolution theory you should do it like others: publish papers and participate in scientific conferences.

      You should get to work, your audience here is low.

      Delete
    3. What evolution theory? Can you please link to it?

      Delete
    4. http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_01

      101 crash course on evolution for you !

      Delete
    5. Nope, no theory there. Try again.

      Delete