Jump to content
Science Forums

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 07/26/2014 in all areas

  1. Welcome to hypography, Rakan! :) The origin of life and biological evolution are related, but distinct. Tthe origin of live involves hypotheses and theories about how the molecules that allow biological cells to replicate – RNA and DNA – came to exist. Biological evolution involves what they have done, in interaction with the environment, since. Being a biology student, I’m sure you know that a deep, or even an accurate, shallow, understanding of these subjects takes years of study and thought. The WWW can be an excellent resource in this study, but hard to navigate because of its overab
    1 point
  2. There are disciplines that do actually require 100% knowledge. eg. Chemistry - or you will go boom boom Engineering or you will kill your buyer(s) engineering is actually one of the worst ones to contend with: You have to know EVERYTHING. Sadly the lawyers have gone nuts on the manufacturers of simple implements: eg. warning label on a hammer. I think the best profession to get into where you don't need to know anything is actually lawyer...it's somewhat like joining a church: as long as the club members accept you, you will get by just fine. Come to think of it, a Priest by comparison
    1 point
  3. greylorn, I don't have time for a point by point refutation of your recent post, but I think none is really necessary. It is clear that you are not familiar with the relatively recent new understanding of what was formerly known as "Junk DNA" and how it appears to work according to recent theories. This lack of familiarity with this new understanding is at the core of why you do not believe the arguments that I and others have presented here about the computational probability of rapidly evolving organisms. The crux of this understanding comes in two parts: "Junk DNA" isn't "junk" bu
    1 point
  4. The genetic code of life really is digital, like the code underlying computer software. I’ve always been compelled by the analogy: The genome as the software instructions for embryology. But I think it’s telling where the analogy breaks down. Computer programs are replete. Instructions are concise & there is very little waste. Repetitive code is consolidated & channeled through subroutines, even where space is available. Anyone attempting to analyze or reverse-engineer any software today can unfailingly follow the principle that any bit of code that presents itself must do some
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...