Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

DNA repair mechanisms reveal a contradiction in evolutionary theory

arroba Email

Digital codes can be protected against failure. A variety of options have been explored by computer programmers because it is important to catch malfunctions early and alert the user to a problem.

“In digital codes, the bits are usually packed into sets of eight bits called bytes. Normally, seven bits are used to record information and one bit – called the ‘parity bit’ – is used for mutation protection, usually denoted as error protection. The seven-bit string 1000001, for example, codes the letter A and 0110011 codes the number 3. If the number of 1’s in the seven-bit string is even, the parity bit is given the value 1, else the value 0. If one of the seven information bits changes, for instance, by radiation, heat, or mechanical influences, they no longer correspond with the parity bit value; this is detected, an error message is generated, and the program stops, is aborted, or a switch is made towards a back-up.”

For more, and why there is a contradiction in evolutionary theory, go here.

Steve Talbott, who wrote the excellent article 'Getting Over The Code Delusion', has another follow up article out; The Unbearable Wholeness of Beings - Steve Talbott http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-unbearable-wholeness-of-beings bornagain77
semi OT: better humans through genetic engineering; chillingly reminiscent of German NAZI thinking in the 1930-40's, TEDtalks - Harvey Fineberg: Are we ready for neo-evolution? http://www.youtube.com/user/TEDtalksDirector#p/u/2/o2WyXD7IaN0 It is interesting to point out, to pour cold water on Dr. Fineberg's utopian visions, the extreme limits that have been discovered that have dashed the once grand enthusiasm for making any significant progress in bringing genetic diseases under control; Getting Over the Code Delusion - From Junk to Living Organism - November 2010 And yet the most striking thing about the genomic revolution is that the revolution never happened. Yes, it’s been an era of the most amazing technical achievement, marked by an overwhelming flood of new data. It’s true that we are gaining, even if largely by trial and error, certain manipulative powers. But our understanding of the integrity and unified functioning of the living cell has, if anything, been more obscured than illumined by the torrent of data. “Many of us in the genetics community,” write Linda and Edward McCabe in DNA: Promise and Peril (2008), “sincerely believed that DNA analysis would provide us with a molecular crystal ball that would allow us to know quite accurately the clinical futures of our individual patients.” Unfortunately, as they and many others now acknowledge, the reality did not prove so straightforward. As minor tokens of the changing consciousness among biologists, one could cite recent articles in the world’s two premier scientific journals, each reflecting upon the 1989 discovery of the “gene for cystic fibrosis.” “The Promise of a Cure: 20 Years and Counting” — so ran the headline in Science, followed by this slightly sarcastic gloss: “The discovery of the cystic fibrosis gene brought big hopes for gene-based medicine; although a lot has been achieved over two decades, the payoff remains just around the corner.” An echo quickly came from Nature, without the sarcasm: “One Gene, Twenty Years: When the cystic fibrosis gene was found in 1989, therapy seemed around the corner. Two decades on, biologists still have a long way to go.” The story has been repeated for one gene after another, which may be why molecular biologist Tom Misteli offered such a startling postscript to the unbounded optimism of the Human Genome Project. “Comparative genome analysis and large-scale mapping of genome features,” he wrote in the journal Cell, “shed little light onto the Holy Grail of genome biology, namely the question of how genomes actually work in vivo” (that is, in living organisms).,,, http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/getting-over-the-code-delusion ,,,Reality is much starker than Dr. Fineberg's preferred utopian world would let him realize,,, Human Evolution or Human Entropy? - Dr. John Sanford - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4585582/ ,,,the evidence for the detrimental nature of mutations in humans is overwhelming for scientists have already cited over 100,000 mutational disorders. Inside the Human Genome: A Case for Non-Intelligent Design - Pg. 57 By John C. Avise Excerpt: "Another compilation of gene lesions responsible for inherited diseases is the web-based Human Gene Mutation Database (HGMD). Recent versions of HGMD describe more than 75,000 different disease causing mutations identified to date in Homo-sapiens." I went to the mutation database website cited by John Avise and found: HGMD®: Now celebrating our 100,000 mutation milestone! http://www.biobase-international.com/pages/index.php?id=hgmddatabase notes; Insight into cells could lead to new approach to medicines Excerpt: Scientists expected to find simple links between individual proteins but were surprised to find that proteins were inter-connected in a complex web. Dr Victor Neduva, of the University of Edinburgh, who took part in the study, said: "Our studies have revealed an intricate network of proteins within cells that is much more complex than we previously thought. http://www.physorg.com/news196402353.html Scientists Map All Mammalian Gene Interactions – August 2010 Excerpt: Mammals, including humans, have roughly 20,000 different genes.,,, They found a network of more than 7 million interactions encompassing essentially every one of the genes in the mammalian genome. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100809142044.htm A comparative approach for the investigation of biological information processing: An examination of the structure and function of computer hard drives and DNA – David J D’Onofrio1, Gary An – Jan. 2010 Excerpt: It is also important to note that attempting to reprogram a cell’s operations by manipulating its components (mutations) is akin to attempting to reprogram a computer by manipulating the bits on the hard drive without fully understanding the context of the operating system. (T)he idea of redirecting cellular behavior by manipulating molecular switches may be fundamentally flawed; that concept is predicated on a simplistic view of cellular computing and control. Rather, (it) may be more fruitful to attempt to manipulate cells by changing their external inputs: in general, the majority of daily functions of a computer are achieved not through reprogramming, but rather the varied inputs the computer receives through its user interface and connections to other machines. http://www.tbiomed.com/content/7/1/3 It seems that Dr. Fineberg's primary motive for 'controlling' evolution was his desire to live longer, I have a way Dr. Fineberg can live longer; EVOLUTION and The Christian Experience - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-3w44I9zK__E/evolution/ John 11:26 "and whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?" The Near Death Experience of Mickey Robinson - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4045544/ bornagain77
Joseph@1 Also parity bits are the simplest and most basic error technique. ZFS goes as far as to use checksums to verify integrity. andrewjg
Unbounded random change of digital codes – for instance by random change of bits or by copying a random string of bits and inserting it elsewhere in the code – is impossible because the normal mutation protection is an intrinsic part of digital codes and the program languages in use, and cannot be switched off. Our mutation protection perspective of the evolutionary dynamics of digital and nucleotide codes thus reveals the presence of a paradox in evolutionary theory between the necessity and the disadvantage of dysfunctioning mutation protection.
Mr. Tyler's conclusion: "The paper shows that all the empirical evidences for evolutionary processes (Darwin's finches, lizard legs, etc) fit into the mutational robustness (that is, the idea that there is an unbounded potential for mutational innovation and that repair mechanisms are not a limit to this) type of change." Keep in mind ... There is no controversy. And ... “There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution,” said Eugenie Scott, an anthropologist and executive director of the National Center for Science Education. http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/texassouthwest/legislature/stories/DN-evolution_22tex.ART.State.Edition1.4e90af7.html Proponentist
As to; 'DNA codes are far more sophisticated than their human counterparts, and they also have a variety of repair mechanisms.' Repair mechanisms in DNA include: A proofreading system that catches almost all errors A mismatch repair system to back up the proofreading system Photoreactivation (light repair) Removal of methyl or ethyl groups by O6 - methylguanine methyltransferase Base excision repair Nucleotide excision repair Double-strand DNA break repair Recombination repair Error-prone bypass http://www.newgeology.us/presentation32.html further note; Quantum Dots Spotlight DNA-Repair Proteins in Motion - March 2010 Excerpt: "How this system works is an important unanswered question in this field," he said. "It has to be able to identify very small mistakes in a 3-dimensional morass of gene strands. It's akin to spotting potholes on every street all over the country and getting them fixed before the next rush hour." Dr. Bennett Van Houten - of note: A bacterium has about 40 team members on its pothole crew. That allows its entire genome to be scanned for errors in 20 minutes, the typical doubling time.,, These smart machines can apparently also interact with other damage control teams if they cannot fix the problem on the spot. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100311123522.htm Moreover, "Quantum Information/Computation" which is not reducible to the materialistic framework of neo-Darwinism (A. Aspect), is found to be integral to DNA; Quantum Information/Entanglement In DNA & Protein Folding - short video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5936605/ In the preceding video, 'Gretchen' asked if quantum entanglement/information could also somehow be measured in protein structures, besides just DNA, and it turns out that quantum entanglement/information has already been detected in protein structures. Here is one such measure; Proteins with cruise control provide new perspective: Excerpt: “A mathematical analysis of the experiments showed that the proteins themselves acted to correct any imbalance imposed on them through artificial mutations and restored the chain to working order.” http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S22/60/95O56/ further notes; 3-D Structure Of Human Genome: Fractal Globule Architecture Packs Two Meters Of DNA Into Each Cell - Oct. 2009 Excerpt: the information density in the nucleus is trillions of times higher than on a computer chip -- while avoiding the knots and tangles that might interfere with the cell's ability to read its own genome. Moreover, the DNA can easily unfold and refold during gene activation, gene repression, and cell replication. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091008142957.htm DNA Optimized for Photostability Excerpt: These nucleobases maximally absorb UV-radiation at the same wavelengths that are most effectively shielded by ozone. Moreover, the chemical structures of the nucleobases of DNA allow the UV-radiation to be efficiently radiated away after it has been absorbed, restricting the opportunity for damage. http://www.reasons.org/dna-soaks-suns-rays bornagain77
The problem with parity bit fault detection is when an even number of bits get changed, for example 1000001 becomes 1000010. This observed phenomena led some companies to adopt redundant circuits- that is two circuits (hopefully) churning out the same data and each being checked against the other to make sure that is so. The thinking was that there was no way for the same data bit failure to occur in both circuits at the same time. Just sayin'... Joseph

Leave a Reply