Whenever there is need for the production of a particular protein inside the cell, the following summarized events take place;

1. The enzyme known as RNA polymerase make a "copy" of little relevant information from the DNA located inside the nucleus of a cell. This little transcribed copy of DNA is called the messenger RNA.

2. The messenger RNA now "travel" out of the nucleus and head toward the cytoplasm to find the ribosomes.

3. The ribosomes then "read" and "translate" the information carried by the messenger RNA.

4. The transfer RNA "transport" the necessary raw materials (different amino acids) from the cytoplasm to the factory (i:e the ribosomes) where they would be assembled and processed into a functional protein base on the translation process done by the ribosomes on the information carried by the messenger RNA.

5. The functional protein would now be "transfer" to the exact place where it is needed, either inside the cell or outside the cell.

Based on the events of protein synthesis explained above, let us ask some reasonable questions;

How did RNA polymerase manage to RECOGNIZE and COPY the required little information out of the bank of information contained inside the DNA ?
It is like you are being asked to go and copy a little information written on a particular page of a voluminous encyclopedia. See how difficult the task would be for you to do despite your intelligence and consciousness.
But now consider an ordinary enzyme like RNA polymerase that lack such intelligence and consciousness. How did it manage to carry out this difficult task ?
How did the enzyme "know" where to start copying the information and where to stop ?
Can this biological information itself (i:e DNA) and this enzyme (meant to recognize and copy different portions of it ) evolved by chance or came to exist by intelligent design?

Again, how did messenger RNA manage to travel out of the nucleus and head toward the ribosomes ?
Out of all the organelles (like mitochondria, golgi apparatus, lysosomes, smooth endoplasmic reticulum, secretory vesicles, centrosomes etc) present inside the cytoplasm, why did messenger RNA decide to "choose" ribosomes and move toward it ?
Can this wise choice evolved by chance or came to exist by intelligent design ?

Furthermore, how did ribosomes manage to "read" and "translate" this biological information ? Was this process of reading and translating evolved by chance or came to exist by intelligent design ?

Moreover , look at the transfer RNAs that transport the raw materials (different amino acids) to the factory (ribosomes) where they are assembled and processed to become a functional protein. Again, why did transfer RNA also manage to deposit those raw materials inside the ribosomes out of many other organelles present inside the cytoplasm ?
Was this also evolved by chance or came to exist by intelligent design ?

Finally, after the production of the required protein, how did protein manage to be transported to the site where they are exactly needed ? Was this process of transportation to the targeted site also evolved by chance or came to exist by intelligent design ? Does chance has any "will or power" to choose what the cell require ?

If all these events are too complex, specific, directional and purposeful to be evolved by CHANCE, then is it not "INTELLIGENCE" that is orchestrating all these events ? Is there any third option ?

But if this "intelligence" cannot be attributed to unintelligent and unconscious atoms or entities that make up the cell organelles or the physical universe, then who is the owner of this very intelligence other than the Creator of all living things ? It is this very intelligent Creator we describe as God

MJBOLT:

another incoherent trash

How and why is it incoherent ?

Hold on to your archaic dogmatic trash... Don't bring atheist into this... I'm sure you are second guessing every shit in ur holy pamphlet to

No wonder you're a religious fanatic

Abdulgaffar22:


How and why is it incoherent ?

coleoneee:
No wonder you're a religious fanatic

Has this submission of yours explained why my post is an incoherent trash ? Try to be sincere

sorry abdulgaffar22, i was about responding to your question. But reading down to the end i noticed you just want to ridicule all atheist and evolution.


first of all not all atheist can answer the questions you put up there cause atheism means lack of belief in god or gods simple! atheism does not tell you how to behave or what is right or wrong. Atheism is just a name used to categorize people who do not believe in supernatural beings.

Back to your question you keep claiming evolution is random. That just shows you do not understand the topic you are trying to debunk. Evolution is not random or by chance!

now cells know how to go about the activities you mentioned up there by a process called mitosis and meiosis.

please stop reading the quran in 2019 ( there is no wisdom in that book)

hakeem4:
sorry abdulgaffar22, i was about responding to your question. But reading down to the end i noticed you just want to ridicule all atheist and evolution.

I am not here to ridicule any body or any theory. But to establish facts.

hakeem4:


first of all not all atheist can answer the questions you put up there cause atheism means lack of belief in god or gods simple! atheism does not tell you how to behave or what is right or wrong. Atheism is just a name used to categorize people who do not believe in supernatural beings.

Are you not an atheist ? Do you believe in any supernatural being ?

hakeem4:


Back to your question you keep claiming evolution is random. That just shows you do not understand the topic you are trying to debunk. Evolution is not random or by chance!

If new genetic information require for macrevolution is not by random process of chance ( DNA mutations), then how did such information originate ?

hakeem4:


now cells know how to go about the activities you mentioned up there by a process called mitosis and meiosis.

Your ignorance is at peak

Don't you know that the events of protein synthesis I explained up there are also part of the events involved in mitosis and meiosis ? Without the production of new set of proteins, new cells produced by mitosis and meiosis cannot exist.

Abdulgaffar22:


I am not here to ridicule any body or any theory. But to establish facts.

to establish a fact is to drop evidence, what you just came to do here was to show your ignorance!

Are you not an atheist ? Do you believe in any supernatural being ?

yes ! i do not believe in any form of the supernatural being, but that does not mean i should know the answer to many questions. for example if an atheist is a lawyer by profession, you do not expect him to answer this question you posed up there. Atheism is just lack of belief in god!

If new genetic information require for macrevolution is not by random process of chance ( DNA mutations), then how did such information originate ?

well the only part of evolution that is random is the mutation. which information are you referring?

Your ignorance is at peak

Don't you know that the events of protein synthesis I explained up there are also part of the events involved in mitosis and meiosis ? Without the production of new set of proteins, new cells produced by mitosis and meiosis cannot exist.

The questions you asked have been answered in many scientific journals so it would waste my time to start explaining here in a religious section
reference 1
reference 2
reference 3

Another trash.
Avoid Topics from
Olaadegbu
Jesusjnr
Abdugafar
Eternalbeing

hakeem4:
sorry abdulgaffar22,

please stop reading the quran in 2019 ( there is no wisdom in that book)

...And your name is Hakeem?!

CandidSeeker:


...And your name is Hakeem?!

well I’m not a Muslim, I’ve never been. I just had a Muslim name cause my dad is a Muslim

hakeem4:


yes ! i do not believe in any form of the supernatural being, but that does not mean i should know the answer to many questions. for example if an atheist is a lawyer by profession, you do not expect him to answer this question you posed up there. Atheism is just lack of belief in god!

Before a sincere lawyer can resolve within his mind that there is no God, he must have possessed an adequate explanation on how he himself and all other living things came to exist. Otherwise, the belief of such an atheistic lawyer would be base on ignorance and self desire; not on concrete and good reason

hakeem4:

well the only part of evolution that is random is the mutation. which information are you referring?

But mutation is the back bone of evolution. Without mutations causing variations, natural selection has nothing to act upon. Natural selection only explain the "survival" of the fittest. It does nothing in explaining the "arrival" of the fittest. Yet the new species have to arrive before they can survive.
You're asking me about the information I was referring to. Don't you know that before a simple life forms like bacteria can be transformed into higher life forms like cockroaches, additional new genetic information is required ? So how did evolution manage to source for this new information ?

hakeem4:


The questions you asked have been answered in many scientific journals so it would waste my time to start explaining here in a religious section

I have gone through your references, they did not answer any of my questions. But if you believe they do, then just quote the answer to my first question that says;
how did RNA polymerase manage to RECOGNIZE and COPY the required little information out of the bank of information contained inside the DNA ?

Abdulgaffar22:


Before a sincere lawyer can resolve within his mind that there is no God, he must have possessed an adequate explanation on how he himself and all other living things came to exist. Otherwise, the belief of such an atheistic lawyer would be base on ignorance and self desire; not on concrete and good reason

. wait! this dude what is your problem? Atheism is the lack of belief in god. The lawyer can decide to belief aliens created human. Atheism is not science. most atheist just rely on the answer science provides cause its tested and its true.

But mutation is the back bone of evolution. Without mutations causing variations, natural selection has nothing to act upon. Natural selection only explain the "survival" of the fittest. It does nothing in explaining the "arrival" of the fittest. Yet the new species have to arrive before they can survive.
You're asking me about the information I was referring to. Don't you know that before a simple life forms like bacteria can be transformed into higher life forms like cockroaches, additional new genetic information is required ? So how did evolution manage to source for this new information ?

This type of question should not be asked in the 21st century. new information are added to the DNA by Mutation, and if the mutation is beneficial to the organism it can pass it down. can evolution generate new information

I have gone through your references, they did not answer any of my questions. But if you believe they do, then just quote the answer to my first question that says;
how did RNA polymerase manage to RECOGNIZE and COPY the required little information out of the bank of information contained inside the DNA ?

i saw a topic on reddit so you could probably go there to read the information How does an RNA 'know' which DNA strand to copy during transcription?

StrikeBack:
Another trash.
Avoid Topics from
Olaadegbu
Jesusjnr
Abdugafar
Eternalbeing

Why na? Sometimes we can still pick one or two senses from nonsense.

hakeem4:
. wait! this dude what is your problem? Atheism is the lack of belief in god. The lawyer can decide to belief aliens created human. Atheism is not science. most atheist just rely on the answer science provides cause its tested and its true.

If lawyer decided to believe in an alien as the creator of human being, then we can still refer that alien as the "god" of the lawyer. In that case, the lawyer is no longer an atheist.

Yes, atheism is not science. But science of evolution provide a refuge for the atheists in the sense that it makes them not to worry again concerning how they came to exist. So atheism and science of evolution are closely related

hakeem4:


This type of question should not be asked in the 21st century. new information are added to the DNA by Mutation, and if the mutation is beneficial to the organism it can pass it down.

As agreed by all scientists, the probability of harmful mutations being occurred is far greater than that of beneficial mutations. Therefore, a GREAT number of beneficial mutations ( like those require for the transformation of lower to higher species of life ) must be accompanied by corresponding GREATER number of harmful mutations.
In other words, before hundreds of beneficial mutation can become fixed in one place, thousands of harmful mutations would have been implanted elsewhere and before thousands of beneficial mutations can become fixed in one place, millions of harmful mutations would have been implanted elsewhere.
This is exactly the reason why lower species cannot mutate to become higher species .

The reference you quote up there is talking about theistic evolution i:e evolution that has been guided by God from the beginning. It has nothing to do with natural evolution we are discussing.

hakeem4:

i saw a topic on reddit so you could probably go there to read the information

The only reasonable thing I can find on the reddit you referenced goes thus;

"RNA knows which strand to copy because it finds the sequence of code that says "Here's a gene to read", termed a promoter, which causes an RNA polymerase to bind to the strand and transcribe the code in the 3' to 5' direction, creating mRNA, until it reaches a sequence that tells the polymerase to stop."

But this has not answered my question. This is because every strand of DNA to be copied has its own "promoter" which enable RNA polymerase to bind to the strand. This implies that there are many "promoters" for different strands of DNA.
So my question can now be rephrased as follows; how did RNA polymerase RECOGNIZE the "promoter" of the strand to be copied during the process of transcription of a particular DNA strand ?

Here is the analogy; you are being asked to go and copy a particular information on a particular page of a voluminous encyclopedia. The "promoter" is just like a page number where you are going to see that information. But if you are not told before hand that the information you're looking for is on a particular page, how are you going to recognize that actual page out of many pages of the encyclopedia ?

This parallels the question that says how did RNA polymerase manage to recognize the "actual promoter" of the strand to be copied out of many promoters meant for the different strands of DNA ?

How does hydrogen know how to combine with oxygen into water? OMG, hydrogen is not smart therefore intelligent designer! SMH.

LordReed:
How does hydrogen know how to combine with oxygen into water? OMG, hydrogen is not smart therefore intelligent designer! SMH.

We are discussing how an ordinary enzyme, RNA polymerase, that lack consciousness and intelligence manage to CHOOSE the "correct answer" out of many great number of options set before it .

And you are telling us how hydrogen react with oxygen to form water using CHEMICAL LAW of definite proportion.

Don't you think that the "act of choosing" from many options is not base on natural law but base on intelligence whereas "chemical reactions between two substances" follow a pure natural law

Abdulgaffar22:


We are discussing how an ordinary enzyme, RNA polymerase, that lack consciousness and intelligence manage to CHOOSE the "correct answer" out of many great number of options set before it .

And you are telling us how hydrogen react with oxygen to form water using CHEMICAL LAW of definite proportion.

Don't you think that the "act of choosing" from many options is not base on natural law but base on intelligence whereas "chemical reactions between two substances" follow a pure natural law

LoL! You actually don't know that the RNA is a chemical? Hint is in the name .... ACID.

LordReed:


LoL! You actually don't know that the RNA is a chemical? Hint is in the name .... ACID.

Do you really understand what we are discussing ? I guess you didn't.

Binding of RNA polymerase to a promoter sequence of a DNA strand may follow a chemical law but the act of CHOOSING the correct promoter out of thousand of promoters cannot be based on chemical law.

Abdulgaffar22:


Do you really understand what we are discussing ? I guess you didn't.

Binding of RNA polymerase to a promoter sequence of a DNA strand may follow a chemical law but the act of CHOOSING the correct promoter out of thousand of promoters cannot be based on chemical law.

What you don't understand is that it is not choosing anything. It's a chemical reaction.

LordReed:


What you don't understand is that it is not choosing anything. It's a chemical reaction.

If it is not choosing anything, why not copying the whole DNA from beginning to the end just like what we see in DNA replication ?

Abdulgaffar22:


If it is not choosing anything, why not copying the whole DNA from beginning to the end just like what we see in DNA replication ?

This is like asking why hydrogen forms a short molecule with oxygen but forms complex chains with carbon. It is based on the nature of the reactants.

LordReed:


This is like asking why hydrogen forms a short molecule with oxygen but forms complex chains with carbon. It is based on the nature of the reactants.

But who instruct DNA polymerase to busy with DNA replication and also instruct RNA polymerase to engage in transcription ? Can complementary natures of these two enzymes evolved by chance ?

Abdulgaffar22:


But who instruct DNA polymerase to busy with DNA replication and also instruct RNA polymerase to engage in transcription ? Can complementary natures of these two enzymes evolved by chance ?

These are chemical reactions, there are no "instructions" going on.

LordReed:


These are chemical reactions, there are no "instructions" going on.

So the process involve in copying of information from one template (DNA) into another template (messenger RNA) is a chemical reaction ?

Similarly, the movement of this template of information (messenger RNA) out of the nucleus toward the ribosomes in the cytoplasm is also a chemical reaction ?

Again, the process of translating this template of information by the ribosomes is a chemical reaction ?

Furthermore, transporting the raw materials (different amino acids) by the vehicle (transfer RNA) to the factory (ribosomes) where the raw materials would be assembled into a finished product (functional protein) base on the information carried by messenger RNA is also chemical reaction ?

Finally, transportation of this finished product (functional protein) from the factory (the ribosomes) to where they are needed is also a chemical reaction ?

Think very well. Honestly you have been deceived. Can all these coherent, conscious and intelligent events be explained away by chemical reactions ?

Abdulgaffar22:


So the process involve in copying of information from one template (DNA) into another template (messenger RNA) is a chemical reaction ?

Similarly, the movement of this template of information (messenger RNA) out of the nucleus toward the ribosomes in the cytoplasm is also a chemical reaction ?

Again, the process of translating this template of information by the ribosomes is a chemical reaction ?

Furthermore, transporting the raw materials (different amino acids) by the vehicle (transfer RNA) to the factory (ribosomes) where they would be assembled into a functional protein base on the information carried by messenger RNA is also chemical reaction ?

Finally, transportation of the functional protein from the factory (the ribosomes) to where they are needed is also a chemical reaction ?

Think very well. Honestly you have been deceived. Can all these coherent, conscious and intelligent events be explained away by chemical reactions ?

1. You can never by argument win the heart of a true atheist.
2. The key to conviction is enlightenment.
Look at LordReed's point of view, he sees it as a natural reaction with no effect whatsoever of an intelligent designer.
{As hydrogen will react with Chlorine or oxygen and not neon or argon, not because an intelligent designer is involved but because of the natural build up of the reacting elements. So, this kind of natural build up is responsible and not some intelligent designer.
From Your point of view: There is just too much coordination and perfection and high-odd probability that this just happens, not once but all the time. This truly can never be by chance, and evolution is just blabbing and mincing words over and over. Thus, the need for or the certainty that an intelligent being is responsible.
{Just as how intelligent humans are responsible for this kind of things in the case of humanoids, Robots, programs and all}.
You see, you both felt your view was right and from anyone watching from the stands some will go for his view and some will go for yours.
As we are humans, we are bound to skew things to how we want to see thing and not rightfully the way they are. That is why there is need for a judge, something impartial. Science, logic and reasoning are generally termed to be the judge to arguments like this.
So, You won't or can't convince him and any other atheist that way because even the judges have not so much to say.
That being said,
It is normal for all beings to pick sides as deem fit provided there is no full conviction or proof that it is like this or like that. But, it then takes a fully blinded person to still ignorantly say something is wrong even when science and reasoning say it is right.
This blinded people are the most common type of atheists we have {Although some of them can see, and their disbelief is actually a form of quest}.
After seeing evidences beyond doubt, they will say "Well its possible there are other possible ways, we just need time to figure it out, for the time being we simply would not belief".
Is this not stupidity of the highest degree??

Abdulgaffar22:


But who instruct DNA ......

You need to either go back to school or learn to listen and be educated here for free.

Abdulgaffar22:


So the process involve in copying of information from one template (DNA) into another template (messenger RNA) is a chemical reaction ?

Similarly, the movement of this template of information (messenger RNA) out of the nucleus toward the ribosomes in the cytoplasm is also a chemical reaction ?

Again, the process of translating this template of information by the ribosomes is a chemical reaction ?

Furthermore, transporting the raw materials (different amino acids) by the vehicle (transfer RNA) to the factory (ribosomes) where they would be assembled into a functional protein base on the information carried by messenger RNA is also chemical reaction ?

Finally, transportation of the functional protein from the factory (the ribosomes) to where they are needed is also a chemical reaction ?

Think very well. Honestly you have been deceived. Can all these coherent, conscious and intelligent events be explained away by chemical reactions ?

Yes to all of them. The deception is on your part, you seem to think these things are little entities run around on little legs, obeying the instructions of a divine being. DNA and RNA are molecules, chemicals. Their transport around the cell and their operations are all governed by the laws constraining chemical reactions but delusional people like you get confused by use of terms like code and selection then begin to imagine that these are discrete entities capable of coherent thought enough to obey instructions. It's not my fault that your secondary school education was so lacking.

LordReed:


Yes to all of them. The deception is on your part, you seem to think these things are little entities run around on little legs, obeying the instructions of a divine being. DNA and RNA are molecules, chemicals. Their transport around the cell and their operations are all governed by the laws constraining chemical reactions but delusional people like you get confused by use of terms like code and selection then begin to imagine that these are discrete entities capable of coherent thought enough to obey instructions. It's not my fault that your secondary school education was so lacking.

1. Existence of Information bank ( DNA)
2. Means of copying this information ( messenger RNA)
3. Means of transporting this information to the factory.
4. Existence of the factory itself ( ribosomes) and its ability to read and translate the information
5. Existence of the raw materials (different amino acids) for the factory
6. Means of transporting these raw materials to the factory (existence of transfer RNA)
7. The assembly of raw materials into a finished product (functional protein) inside the factory.
8. Means of transporting this finished product from the factory to where it is needed.

Even if we ASSUME that all the EIGHT entities or events enumerated above were made possible by chemical reactions as you claimed , this assumption has not changed the whole scenario from being coherent and intelligent events. Or does it ? Can all these entities and processes now came into existence by chance ?

Abdulgaffar22:


1. Existence of Information bank ( DNA)
2. Means of copying this information ( messenger RNA)
3. Means of transporting this information to the factory.
4. Existence of the factory itself ( ribosomes) and its ability to read and translate the information
5. Existence of the raw materials (different amino acids) for the factory
6. Means of transporting these raw materials to the factory (existence of transfer RNA)
7. The assembly of raw materials into a finished product (functional protein) inside the factory.
8. Means of transporting this finished product from the factory to where it is needed.

Even if we ASSUME that all the EIGHT entities enumerated above were made possible by chemical reactions , this assumption has not changed the whole scenario from being coherent and intelligent events. Or does it ? Can all these entities and processes came into existence by chance ?

Why is this so hard for you? DNA is not an entity, ribosomes are not entities. It is like calling clouds entities because from them emerges rain, thunder and lightning. They are not intelligent events. They are events obeying and constrained by physical laws. They can into existence by the interaction of the component parts based on the physical laws of the universe.