Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Protein Synthesis . . . what frequent objector AF cannot acknowledge

Categories
rhetoric
Share
Facebook
Twitter/X
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Let us use a handy diagram of protein synthesis:

Protein Synthesis (HT: Wiki Media)

[U/D, Sep 2:] Where, to clarify key terms, let us note a key, classic text, Lehninger, 8th edn:

The information in DNA is encoded in its linear (one-dimensional) sequence of deoxyribonucleotide subunits . . . . A linear sequence of deoxyribonucleotides in DNA codes (through an intermediary, RNA) for the production of a protein with a corresponding linear sequence of amino acids . . . Although the final shape of the folded protein is dictated by its amino acid sequence, the folding of many proteins is aided by “molecular chaperones” . . . The precise three-dimensional structure, or native conformation, of the protein is crucial to its function.” [Principles of Biochemistry, 8th Edn, 2021, pp 194 – 5. Now authored by Nelson, Cox et al, Lehninger having passed on in 1986. Attempts to rhetorically pretend on claimed superior knowledge of Biochemistry, that D/RNA does not contain coded information expressing algorithms using string data structures, collapse. We now have to address the implications of language, goal directed stepwise processes and underlying sophisticated polymer chemistry and molecular nanotech in the heart of cellular metabolism and replication.]

Let’s add more from Lehninger and heirs, who went out of their way to make the point, Oct 29:

Further u/d Sept 2: A look at creating mRNA:

As Wikipedia admits (but, revealingly, does not duly emphasise) with a few telling words:

In molecular biology, RNA polymerase (abbreviated RNAP or RNApol), or more specifically DNA-directed/dependent RNA polymerase (DdRP), is an enzyme that synthesizes RNA from a DNA template. Using the enzyme helicase, RNAP locally opens the double-stranded DNA so that one strand of the exposed nucleotides can be used as a template for the synthesis of RNA, a process called transcription. A transcription factor and its associated transcription mediator complex must be attached to a DNA binding site called a promoter region before RNAP can initiate the DNA unwinding at that position. RNAP not only initiates RNA transcription [–> algorithmic start, notice, transcribing is generally stepwise], it also guides the nucleotides into position, facilitates attachment and elongation [–> notice direct parallel to stepwise synthesis of AA chains for proteins, cf Lehninger 8th edn p 3346: “RNA polymerase elongates an RNA strand by adding ribonucleotide units to the 3 ′- hydroxyl end, building RNA in the 5 ′ → 3 ′ direction”], has intrinsic proofreading and replacement capabilities [–> language], and termination recognition [–> algorithmic halting] capability. In eukaryotes, RNAP can build chains as long as 2.4 million nucleotides.

This is a corner of the general cell metabolism framework:

Where, Yockey observes (highlighted and annotated):

Yockey’s analysis of protein synthesis as a code-based communication process

Where, too, the genetic code is, and its context of application is:

Given, say, Crick:

Crick’s letter

. . . we need to ask, why. END

F/N1: It seems advisable to highlight the layer cake architecture of communication systems

, , , and of Computers, following Tanenbaum:

Clearly, the communication framework does not reduce to the physics of the hardware involved.

F/N2: Dawkins admits

He tries to deflect the force by appeal to “natural selection,” but protein synthesis and linked metabolic processes are causally antecedent to self replication and therefore pose a chicken before egg challenge especially for origin of life.

Comments
PS, Johnson's reply to Lewontin
For scientific materialists the materialism comes first; the science comes thereafter. [Emphasis original -- the context is Lewontin in NYRB] We might more accurately term them "materialists employing science." And if materialism is true, then some materialistic theory of evolution has to be true simply as a matter of logical deduction, regardless of the evidence.
[--> notice, the power of an undisclosed, question-begging, controlling assumption . . . often put up as if it were a mere reasonable methodological constraint; emphasis added. Let us note how Rational Wiki, so-called, presents it:
"Methodological naturalism is the label for the required assumption of philosophical naturalism when working with the scientific method. Methodological naturalists limit their scientific research to the study of natural causes, because any attempts to define causal relationships with the supernatural are never fruitful, and result in the creation of scientific "dead ends" and God of the gaps-type hypotheses." [NB: I am aware that Rational Wiki has backed away, un-announced, from the cat-out-of-the-bag direct phrasing that was in place a few years ago. That historic phrasing is still valid as a summary of what is going on.]
Of course, this ideological imposition on science that subverts it from freely seeking the empirically, observationally anchored truth about our world pivots on the deception of side-stepping the obvious fact since Plato in The Laws Bk X, that there is a second, readily empirically testable and observable alternative to "natural vs [the suspect] supernatural." Namely, blind chance and/or mechanical necessity [= the natural] vs the ART-ificial, the latter acting by evident intelligently directed configuration. [Cf Plantinga's reply here and here.] And as for the god of the gaps canard, the issue is, inference to best explanation across competing live option candidates. If chance and necessity is a candidate, so is intelligence acting by art through design. And it is not an appeal to ever- diminishing- ignorance to point out that design, rooted in intelligent action, routinely configures systems exhibiting functionally specific, often fine tuned complex organisation and associated information. Nor, that it is the only observed cause of such, nor that the search challenge of our observed cosmos makes it maximally implausible that blind chance and/or mechanical necessity can account for such.]
That theory will necessarily be at least roughly like neo-Darwinism, in that it will have to involve some combination of random changes and law-like processes capable of producing complicated organisms that (in Dawkins’ words) "give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose." . . . . The debate about creation and evolution is not deadlocked . . . Biblical literalism is not the issue. The issue is whether materialism and rationality are the same thing. Darwinism is based on an a priori commitment to materialism, not on a philosophically neutral assessment of the evidence. Separate the philosophy from the science, and the proud tower collapses. [Emphasis added.] [The Unraveling of Scientific Materialism, First Things, 77 (Nov. 1997), pp. 22 – 25.]
kairosfocus
September 5, 2022
September
09
Sep
5
05
2022
06:23 AM
6
06
23
AM
PDT
JVL, your core problem is that an ideology has been imposed on origins a priori, where blind chance and mechanical necessity has never been observed to create FSCO/I beyond 500 - 1,000 bits. Just so, there is good blind needle in haystack reason to infer it is not plausible, and we do have a known source, design. The real problem is not absence of evidence, it is evidence of an ideologically rejected class of cause. That sort of ideological lock out does not end well. KFkairosfocus
September 5, 2022
September
09
Sep
5
05
2022
06:20 AM
6
06
20
AM
PDT
Kairosfocus: That there is common design does not exclude that there are major innovations that have no actual observational evidence of incremental emergence from antecedent simpler forms. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence no matter how much you want that to be true. That is why some people say ID is like a God of the gaps method of reasoning: oh, look, there's a transition here that isn't completely clear or documented, must be that some designer bridged that gap. Also, why don't you address what biologists are actually saying instead of creating a false landscape of speculation and arguing against that?JVL
September 4, 2022
September
09
Sep
4
04
2022
02:36 AM
2
02
36
AM
PDT
PPS, as you have just used that humble source Wikipedia, are you willing to acknowledge a further point it makes as is in an update to the OP with an embedded onward cite from Lehninger?
In molecular biology, RNA polymerase (abbreviated RNAP or RNApol), or more specifically DNA-directed/dependent RNA polymerase (DdRP), is an enzyme that synthesizes RNA from a DNA template. Using the enzyme helicase, RNAP locally opens the double-stranded DNA so that one strand of the exposed nucleotides can be used as a template for the synthesis of RNA, a process called transcription. A transcription factor and its associated transcription mediator complex must be attached to a DNA binding site called a promoter region before RNAP can initiate the DNA unwinding at that position. RNAP not only initiates RNA transcription [–> algorithmic start, notice, transcribing is generally stepwise], it also guides the nucleotides into position, facilitates attachment and elongation [–> notice direct parallel to stepwise synthesis of AA chains for proteins, cf Lehninger 8th edn p 3346: “RNA polymerase elongates an RNA strand by adding ribonucleotide units to the 3 ?- hydroxyl end, building RNA in the 5 ? --> 3 ? direction”], has intrinsic proofreading and replacement capabilities [–> language, editing], and termination recognition [–> algorithmic halting] capability. In eukaryotes, RNAP can build chains as long as 2.4 million nucleotides.
That is, the assembly of RNA in the cell -- including mRNA and tRNA -- involves an algorithmic, stepwise assembly process with sequential start, steps, halt. "Template" there may be using complementarity of A-T/U and G-C, but it is here used to effect mRNA etc through an algorithmic process.kairosfocus
September 4, 2022
September
09
Sep
4
04
2022
02:07 AM
2
02
07
AM
PDT
AF, Dawkins, whatever his scientific CV says, explicitly acknowledged that the living cell embeds a code using molecular nanotech system. Are you willing to now acknowledge that this is in fact the general, evidence based consensus? _______ And, to explain your rhetorical stunt of trying to set that aside? ______ KF PS, as a reminder, Lehninger:
"The information in DNA is encoded in its linear (one-dimensional) sequence of deoxyribonucleotide subunits . . . . A linear sequence of deoxyribonucleotides in DNA codes (through an intermediary, RNA) for the production of a protein with a corresponding linear sequence of amino acids . . . Although the final shape of the folded protein is dictated by its amino acid sequence, the folding of many proteins is aided by “molecular chaperones” . . . The precise three-dimensional structure, or native conformation, of the protein is crucial to its function." [Principles of Biochemistry, 8th Edn, 2021, pp 194 – 5. Now authored by Nelson, Cox et al, Lehninger having passed on in 1986. Attempts to rhetorically pretend on claimed superior knowledge of Biochemistry, that D/RNA does not contain coded information expressing algorithms using string data structures, collapse. We now have to address the implications of language, goal directed stepwise processes and underlying sophisticated polymer chemistry and molecular nanotech in the heart of cellular metabolism and replication.]
kairosfocus
September 4, 2022
September
09
Sep
4
04
2022
01:59 AM
1
01
59
AM
PDT
JVL, are you arguing that events in a Darwin warm pond or the equivalent exhibit foresight and planning tied thereto? I doubt it. You full well understand what blind chance and/or mechanical necessity [as in natural forces and dynamic-stochastic processes] entail, and where they would have to start from. Further to this, you are trying to wish away the issue of incremental functional all the way transformation. That there is common design does not exclude that there are major innovations that have no actual observational evidence of incremental emergence from antecedent simpler forms. KFkairosfocus
September 4, 2022
September
09
Sep
4
04
2022
01:54 AM
1
01
54
AM
PDT
But what actual science has Dawkins done?
From the Wikipedia article that you may have missed: He continued as a research student under Tinbergen's supervision, receiving his Doctor of Philosophy[31] degree by 1966, and remained a research assistant for another year.[32][33] Tinbergen was a pioneer in the study of animal behaviour, particularly in the areas of instinct, learning, and choice;[34] Dawkins's research in this period concerned models of animal decision-making.[35] He was awarded a DSc by Oxford in 1989.[33][32] The numbers in square brackets give the citations, if you are in doubt as to the accuracy of Wikipedia on simple facts.Alan Fox
September 4, 2022
September
09
Sep
4
04
2022
01:39 AM
1
01
39
AM
PDT
Kairosfocus: Dere ‘ent enough time . . . to even blind search more than a negligible fraction of the configuration space for 500 – 1,000 bits And no one is saying that a blind search is being done! You keep arguing against that straw man, misinterpreting what the unguided evolutionary theory is saying. That may play well with some ID proponents but it ain't gonna fly with them that knows what the real science is sayin'. Also, there are no islands of function in the biological space. All life forms are related to all other life forms which means there is a developmental path between them.JVL
September 4, 2022
September
09
Sep
4
04
2022
12:21 AM
12
12
21
AM
PDT
Dere 'ent enough time . . . to even blind search more than a negligible fraction of the configuration space for 500 - 1,000 bits, with a sol sys of 10^57 atoms or a cosmos, 10^80, for 10^17s. Contrast, 900 bases to code a typical 300 AA protein, 1800 bits info carrying capacity.kairosfocus
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
08:37 PM
8
08
37
PM
PDT
You're welcome.relatd
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
04:34 PM
4
04
34
PM
PDT
Thanks Relatd.ayearningforpublius
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
04:25 PM
4
04
25
PM
PDT
Ayearningforpublius at 69, According to Dawkins, "enough time" is the substitute for God. It replaces God with atheism. You will find here that regardless of the evidence posted for ID, the wall of defenders of evolution must stand. They must repeat "evolution is a fact" every day. But keep this in mind: The truth must be repeated daily to combat the lies being spread among the people. Speak the truth - daily.relatd
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
03:23 PM
3
03
23
PM
PDT
For Alan Fox. Thanks for the Wikipedia article on Dawkins. But what actual science has Dawkins done? His book "The Blind Watchmaker" sold many books and contributed much to his fame and fortune. But it was all handwaving. On the other hand, real scientific researchers have taken a good hard look (pun intended) at the eye and provide hands-on scientific analysis as to the making of the eye. Dawkins, on the other hand captivates young naive students with Papier-mâché mountains and bended film strips as his laboratory work. Take a look . . . https://ayearningforpublius.wordpress.com/2015/07/14/the-eye-a-biological-miracle-but-of-what-sort/ Yes, Deep Time — the exotic drape that will cover the collection of eyes and hide from public view the rich imaginations of Richard Dawkins, the lead researcher and Program Manager in this magnificent effort. In the meantime, the soldier needing the replacement eye will have to wait … wait to the limit of deep time, measured in unknown billions of years. Not to worry: “given enough time, and an infinite number of chances, anything is possible" (Dawkins). Why does it matter? The Darwin Lobby is very effective in assuring that their version of reality – this “illusion of science” called Darwinian Evolution is the only game in town … the only version presented to the public and taught to present and future generations.ayearningforpublius
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
02:45 PM
2
02
45
PM
PDT
Not only is methodological naturalism the best investigatory methodology of the natural world based on its track record, it is our best defense against those who would attempt to impose their partisan political and religious dogmas on students.
Methodological naturalism is a nonsensical expression. To formulate the definition of the methodological naturalism(and any other definition) you need a mind that is in itself the enemy of naturalism. :lol: Atheists cannot tell what is the chemical formula of the ideas presented in this message.Lieutenant Commander Data
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
01:22 PM
1
01
22
PM
PDT
I don't like the ads any more then anyone else but it's the price we have to pay for the content, I suppose.Seversky
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
12:06 PM
12
12
06
PM
PDT
@ jvl I understand that fully but this seems excessive they appear in the middle of our commentary.AaronS1978
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
12:03 PM
12
12
03
PM
PDT
AaronS1978: When I unlock my phone in to argue on this site I am hit with a GRATUITOUS amount of ads. More ads than any other place that I visit is this necessary? The owners have to pay the bills somehow. While most of the contributors are not paid the hosting and such do cost. I'm sure they would appreciate monetary contributions.JVL
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
11:47 AM
11
11
47
AM
PDT
“Wrong you are, matey. I’m neither a strict determinist, nor do I deny free will, in the sense that humans, and not only humans, have the ability to make choices among possible alternatives.“ I have no issues being wrong about that, it is something I like being wrong aboutAaronS1978
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
11:00 AM
11
11
00
AM
PDT
Either way, I’m pretty sure I can guess that your viewpoint is there’s no free will and we are completely guided by the environment and our genetics, meat robots for short with zero control over anything.
Wrong you are, matey. I'm neither a strict determinist, nor do I deny free will, in the sense that humans, and not only humans, have the ability to make choices among possible alternatives.Alan Fox
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
10:59 AM
10
10
59
AM
PDT
Haynes not HanesAaronS1978
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
10:27 AM
10
10
27
AM
PDT
By the way off-topic @ the site of uncommon descent I normally block all ads on my phone and I purposely restrict the Internet on my phone so that way I don’t sit there all day wasting time When I unlock my phone in to argue on this site I am hit with a GRATUITOUS amount of ads More ads than any other place that I visit is this necessary?AaronS1978
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:55 AM
9
09
55
AM
PDT
Seversky, they imposed an historically unjustifiable ideologically tendentious redefinition of science and held parents and children hostage for the accreditation of their high school diplomas. That is an inexcusable outrage and it is going to eventually face a day of accounting. To point out a fact documented and highlighted may be unflattering to the NSTA but no one forced them to put those terrible facts on the ground. Fair comment on manifest fact is not a slur. KFkairosfocus
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:50 AM
9
09
50
AM
PDT
@ AF “RNA isn’t hypothetical. It is central to cell function across all extant life. The ribosome is a ribozyme.That RNA can both replicate and act as a catalyst (ribozyme) is strong circumstantial evidence for a precursory RNA world.“ I miss type something? The “RNA world hypothesis” is debated and IS HYPOTHETICAL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3495036/ This is just one article in many articles, try Google scholar RNA world hypothesis debate or discussion. Also since you are a wikininja even that junk source of information discusses the challenges. This comment really doesn’t show that you know anything about organic chemistry or about its history Also did you purposely miss quote me? I was discussing the hypothetical RNA world hypothesis, I mean it’s right in the name. Why did you say that I was indicating RNA and its function was hypothetical? Were you doing that on purpose or you an idiot? “Most of the basic facts are not in dispute. When he runs with the ball into the long grass (I love a mixed metaphor) I tend to pick up on” This is a narrative, did not answer my question, answer the question. “DNA is not organic code. DNA stores protein sequences, among other things, as sequences of nucleotides in triplet genetic code or organic code” Again explaining the physical characteristics of organic chemistry does nothing for your argument that’s it’s not code. Why is it not code and try not to go back to “because it’s a combination of organic compounds” you’re wasting peoples time Because it’s some combination of organic compounds does not disqualify it as a form of code “You may be surprised to learn that there is no”hard problem of consciousness” if you are referring to Chalmers. But I guess that is off-topic. Don’t get me started on free will and determinism, either.“ You may be surprised that there is a hard problem of the consciousness and that you’re probably uneducated on it. I excuse your ignorance. You obviously from the “school of thought” of people like Alin Seth where everything can be explained using the IP metaphor and there is no hard problem of the consciousness or you’re one of Alex Rosenberg’s morons living a perpetual world of cognitive dissidents. You are also very likely not up-to-date on any of Aaron Schruger’s work when it comes to the neuroscience of free will or even John Dylan Hanes more current work (anything 2016+) Either way, I’m pretty sure I can guess that your viewpoint is there’s no free will and we are completely guided by the environment and our genetics, meat robots for short with zero control over anything. I also wouldn’t be surprised if you were a big proponent of GWS for the idea of consciousness often purported by Alin Seth So if you are one of the people that believe we’re meat robots then stop wasting everybody’s time, no one can help what they are and what they think.AaronS1978
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:46 AM
9
09
46
AM
PDT
AF, oh yes you have. Bruce Alberts et al describe string data structure algorithmic code in direct echo of Lehninger. You have been trying to suggest that code is an error of ignorance. Fail. KF PS, More from Alberts et al, p. 7:
the information in the sequence of a messenger RNA molecule is read out in groups of three nucleotides at a time: each triplet of nucleotides, or codon, specifies (codes for) a single amino acid in a corresponding protein. Since the number of distinct triplets that can be formed from four nucleotides is 43, there are 64 possible codons, all of which occur in nature. However, there are only 20 naturally occurring amino acids. That means there are necessarily many cases in which several codons correspond to the same amino acid. This genetic code is read out by a special class of small RNA molecules, the transfer RNAs (tRNAs). Each type of tRNA becomes attached at one end to a specific amino acid, and displays at its other end a specific sequence of three nucleotides—an anticodon— that enables it to recognize, through base-pairing, a particular codon or subset of codons in mRNA. The intricate chemistry that enables these tRNAs to translate a specific sequence of A, C, G, and U nucleotides in an mRNA molecule into a specific sequence of amino acids in a protein molecule occurs on the ribosome, a large multimolecular machine composed of both protein and ribosomal RNA . . . . Special sequences in the DNA serve as punctuation, defining where the information for each protein begins and ends. And individual segments of the long DNA sequence are transcribed into separate mRNA molecules, coding for different proteins. Each such DNA segment represents one gene. A complica- tion is that RNA molecules transcribed from the same DNA segment can often be processed in more than one way, so as to give rise to a set of alternative versions of a protein, especially in more complex cells such as those of plants and animals.
PPS, you seem to overlook aspects of RNA Polymerase, its stepwise sequence action during transcription:
Lehninger 8th edn p 3346: “RNA polymerase elongates an RNA strand by adding ribonucleotide units to the 3 ?- hydroxyl end, building RNA in the 5 ? ? 3 ? direction”
(See u/d's to the OP.)kairosfocus
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:46 AM
9
09
46
AM
PDT
Kairosfocus/34
PPPS, US NSTA’s educational malpractice:
Calling that "malpractice" is an outrageous slur. Not only is methodological naturalism the best investigatory methodology of the natural world based on its track record, it is our best defense against those who would attempt to impose their partisan political and religious dogmas on students. What could be characterized as "malpractice" is the open advocacy of creationism in science classrooms by 13% of high school biology teachers as reported in a survey of same published in 2011. Not only is such practice unconstitutional, it's also a clear and egregious breach of their ethical and contractual duties as educators. [ED: Sev, ideological, question begging imposition as documented and annotated is educational malpractice. KF]Seversky
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:39 AM
9
09
39
AM
PDT
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_DawkinsAlan Fox
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:04 AM
9
09
04
AM
PDT
Dawkins is referenced several times here. Does anyone know if Dawkins is actually a biologist? has he ever done any real research? Or does he just write books and preach in a classroom?ayearningforpublius
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:01 AM
9
09
01
AM
PDT
So what real evidence to you have that would discredit the concept of DNA being organic code used universally amongst all living organisms on this planet?
DNA is not organic code. DNA stores protein sequences, among other things, as sequences of nucleotides in triplet genetic code or organic code, if you prefer. But otherwise OK. It's certainly almost (but not quite - there are a few important and interesting variations) universal across all known living organisms. In short, I'm not out to discredit DNA as a carrier of information.Alan Fox
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
09:00 AM
9
09
00
AM
PDT
...the highly debated RNA world hypothesis can’t say anything it’s a hypothetical organic chemical process, since we like to take things literally.
RNA isn't hypothetical. It is central to cell function across all extant life. The ribosome is a ribozyme.That RNA can both replicate and act as a catalyst (ribozyme) is strong circumstantial evidence for a precursory RNA world.Alan Fox
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
08:53 AM
8
08
53
AM
PDT
...for someone who said you are kinda qualified to discuss biochemistry you have yet to put a single real objection using your knowledge to discredit anything KF has posted
Most of the basic facts are not in dispute. When he runs with the ball into the long grass (I love a mixed metaphor) I tend to pick up on it.Alan Fox
September 3, 2022
September
09
Sep
3
03
2022
08:50 AM
8
08
50
AM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply