Joined: April 2007
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2012,07:31)|
|Quote (Soapy Sam @ Sep. 14 2012,06:44)|
|Quote (keiths @ Sep. 13 2012,21:05)|
|Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 13 2012,14:33)|
|Bwahahahah - Joe G not even on the radar!|
He's still trying to qualify:
|Why is it that artificial ribosomes do NOT function? If their functionality was the result of their physical and chemical components then artificial ribosomes should function just as the ribosomes found inside living organisms.|
Artificial ribosomes are lacking the programming required by compilers to function.
This is one of his current favorites. I thought functional artificial ribosomes had been synthesised, but it doesn't matter either way. It hardly points to a missing magic ingredient - and certainly not capital-D-Design as that ingredient - if you can't. You just haven't got one of the functional points in sequence space yet.
Depends on what you mean by artificial. [Curious how it always comes back to semantics with Jo-Jo.]
Anyway, if one means artificial as 'never before appearing on the Earth', then yes, it has been done. I'll have to look up the reference.
If one means that a human assembled an RNA from scratch, by placing the nucleotides in order one at a time, then no it hasn't been done. Why would that even be a requirement? Has Jo-Jo ever built a car from parts? And I mean parts here, no already assembled components like water pumps and alternators.
So, if Jo-Jo can't build a functioning car from parts, then the claim is that unless cars are built in a factory, they don't work?
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."
- William Dembski -