Skip to comments.The Histone Code (genetic code not the only code?)
Posted on 01/08/2008 7:28:22 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
It is now clear that genetics wont be able to answer all of our questions about human development and disease. These basic biological processes rely heavily on epigenetics the ability to fine-tune the expression of specific genes.
This regulation of gene expression is essential for defining cellular identity and the dysregulation of these processes results in a variety of human diseases. Therefore, understanding these mechanisms will not only enhance our basic knowledge but will also lead to the improved detection, therapy and prognoses of several human diseases.
The histone code hypothesis predicts that the post-translational modifications of histones, alone or in combination, function to direct specific and distinct DNA-templated programs.
(Excerpt) Read more at histonecode.com ...
So, the more we know, the more we don’t know.............
Very intersting ping!
I need Hildebeast, the smartest woman on the planet, to explain this to me!
It will not help creationism one bit. Sorry.
I would say, the more we learn how “fine-tuned” life is, the more we should be looking for the possibility of a “fine-tuner.”
Let's see...how did it go? From previous info; proteins could vary somewhat, depending on what other neighboring alleles were present, or not? Something like that.
It's as if there are codes, within the code? As opposed to being simply "here's the gene that makes this protein" [with no variation, period].
I just wonder how many codes we will find as we go forward. Codes upon codes upon codes...We truly are fearfully and WONDERFULLY made!
Aah, come on. Do you have to be such a one-trick pony? Such a one note Johnny? (three cord wonder?)
You're deeper than that. I've even seen you be that way, a time or two... 8^)
==It will not help creationism one bit.
God’s creation does not need the help of science. Quite the contrary...Science needs God’s creation.
Now, back to our regularly scheduled program ---
(I'd better go follow the link and read the article, lol!)
That’s what I noticed in college, even in all my meteorology courses. Every thing we learned raised a whole host of questions that still needed to be answered.
Isn’t God’s creation fascinating!
PS Remember that article I posted about the “Guinea Pig Kids”?
A code is a basic construct of language. Only intelligent beings use language. If biology has built in codes, it implies an intelligent code giver created it all. Seems rather intuitive to me.
Same here. But some FRevolutionists find this intuitive notion highly controversial...even anathema. Indeed, they have gone so far as to say that evolution is the study of natural phenomena that give the “appearance” of design. They remind me of Buddhists who seek to convince mankind that all is illusion. They have even adopted a kind of yin and yang (random mutation plus natural selection).
Thanks for the ping!
Someone wrote the code.
What great faith those evos display; to deny the intelligence behind a code when by their own admission it gives the *appearance* of design.
Evos are constantly demanding evidence of intelligence or design and here we have it and they even admit it and still turn around and deny it.
If natural phenomena gives the appearance of design, why make it so complicated? Why try so hard to deny the obvious? Why look for explanations to show that the appearance of design is just happenstance? They’re making it so much more complicated than it is in their desperate attempts to deny a creator.
It won’t hurt it either.
How could I forget. Using unwilling human subjects for human experimentation makes my blood boil.
[[I would say, the more we learn how fine-tuned life is, the more we should be looking for the possibility of a fine-tuner.]]
True, that would be the logical step to take, but unfortunately, that won’t happen- the Design Denialists have the ever obscure “We don’t know how it evolved, but we might one day” mantra to fall back on if explanations are not available- having an unfalsifiable hypothesis covers a multitude of biological sins it seems- and let’s never forget, those of us who look for the logical explanations based on the facts are the psuedoscientists and psuedosciecne followers while those who state time + biological mistakes answers everything (Regardless of a complete lack of evidence to back that pipedream up)- Never question the god of Naturalism- it’s advocates get ugly if you do.
Garjog wrote [[A code is a basic construct of language. Only intelligent beings use language. If biology has built in codes, it implies an intelligent code giver created it all. Seems rather intuitive to me.]]
Tsk Tsk- everyone knows that when 1000 violins are uncovered in an ancient ruins that they must have evolved from raw materials. Never question the god of materialism.
doh- I meant the god of naturalism- not materialsm lol- carry on
==How could I forget. Using unwilling human subjects for human experimentation makes my blood boil.
GlaxoSmithKline = the makers of AZT.
“A code is a basic construct of language. Only intelligent beings use language. If biology has built in codes, it implies an intelligent code giver created it all. Seems rather intuitive to me.”
All praise the Flying Spaghetti Monster and His noodly appendage!
“Someone wrote the code.”
Sounds like a Kucinich theory.
actually, it does, by exposing the guys who say they know so much as frauds.
So where’d the code come from if nobody wrote it?
Surprise, surprise (not really). I recommend the Politically Incorrect Guide to Science. One chapter discusses exaggerated claims for genetic engineering, cloning, decoding the genome, and other money absorbing fads in biology that did not live up to their hype.
Actually, if it's good basic science, this can only help creationism. The more good, basic, non-politicised science we get, the more evolution is falsified and the more the field opens up for reconsideration of alternatives.
Why, just like the code for the computer programs you're using - it magically appeared abiogenetically out of nowhere, due to completely naturalistic forces!
Just like the universe popping out of nowhere, for no reason, expanding faster than the speed of light to fill all known space in a trillion-trillionth of a second, organizing itself into complex structures, and establishing it’s own laws?
How silly of me.
Of course we should then expect incredibly complex genetic code to assemble itself.
“So whered the code come from if nobody wrote it?”
First, it’s not ‘code’ the way you and I understand a human-created code to be. If you think so, you’re anthropomorphizing it.
Second, there’s an entire branch of chemistry/physics which demonstrates the capability you questioned -
Some of the links on that page are worth following, such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergence
“==How could I forget. Using unwilling human subjects for human experimentation makes my blood boil.”
When it does boil, make sure you’re at a high altitude. The low air pressure means that your blood will at least boil at a lower temperature.
LOL, as soon as I read your response, I thought “I’ll be some yahoo will try to make the “self-organisation” argument, and sure enough, in the very next post, GITP did just that. Sure. Like convection currents prove that stereospecific self-organisation happened. Next, please.
“LOL, as soon as I read your response, I thought Ill be some yahoo will try to make the self-organisation argument, and sure enough, in the very next post, GITP did just that. Sure. Like convection currents prove that stereospecific self-organisation happened. Next, please.”
When I posted it, I thought, well, some hayseed yay-hoo will dismiss it out of hand with a ridiculous comment, but maybe someone else with the capability to, will actually learn something from the exchange.
There are a lot of examples beyond convection currents - you didn’t disappoint me by picking that one though. I expected as much.
Actually, the more we know, the less we have to learn.
Would help ID, though...
Your inability to understand something is neither proof nor implication that something else does.
OK. Enlighten me. How does something as complex as DNA assemble itself?
The mental gymnastics and contortions one has to go through to deny the stunningly obvious is truly breathtaking.
Don’t the evos claim that faith is believing in something that is impossible in defiance of all the evidence. This would certainly qualify. What great faith the evos have.