New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: John Larkin on 24 Aug 2006 17:51 On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:39:39 +0100, John Woodgate <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> wrote: >In message <c08re2t573bss4en3h0d07hb1o599ert3p(a)4ax.com>, dated Thu, 24 >Aug 2006, John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin(a)highTHISlandtechnology.com> writes >>You can't know that, either. > >This is futile. It's not possible to have a rational debate in the face >of unreasoning denials. >> We can certainly agree on that. I an impressed by your thorough understanding of how DNA actually works. > >For sufficiently non-living values of 'alive'. If DNA is not alive, and everything is just polymers and static blueprints, what is alive? John
From: Dirk Bruere at NeoPax on 24 Aug 2006 21:44 John Larkin wrote: > On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 16:39:39 +0100, John Woodgate > <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> wrote: > >> In message <c08re2t573bss4en3h0d07hb1o599ert3p(a)4ax.com>, dated Thu, 24 >> Aug 2006, John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin(a)highTHISlandtechnology.com> writes >>> You can't know that, either. >> This is futile. It's not possible to have a rational debate in the face >> of unreasoning denials. > > We can certainly agree on that. I an impressed by your thorough > understanding of how DNA actually works. > >> For sufficiently non-living values of 'alive'. > > If DNA is not alive, and everything is just polymers and static > blueprints, what is alive? Life is a verb, not a noun. It's a process, not a 'thing'. -- http://onetribe.me.uk/ - The UK's only occult talk show Presented by Dirk Bruere and Marc Power on ResonanceFM
From: Reg Edwards on 24 Aug 2006 23:50 Just a thought. There is no essential difference between living and dead matter. Nothing of consequence happens between 1 second before death and 1 second after it. Between 1 minute before birth and 1 minute after it. Matter continues to change with TIME, at varying rates, according to the irreversible Laws of the Universe, the Laws of Nature, the Laws of God, or just the rigid Laws of Mathematics, E = m*c^2. Entropy Rules! And that just about sums everything up. Close down the Internet! And we can all go back (not in time) to everlasting sleep and Dark Matter. Good night! ---- Reg.
From: John Woodgate on 25 Aug 2006 01:43 In message <0l7se2tv5ks4tg6e2p1mcd87dao9hspsju(a)4ax.com>, dated Thu, 24 Aug 2006, John Larkin <jjSNIPlarkin(a)highTHISlandtechnology.com> writes >If DNA is not alive, and everything is just polymers and static >blueprints, what is alive? Complete creatures. Half a mouse isn't alive, but it contains an awful lot of DNA. What you are doing is to assume a special definition of 'alive' that makes your statement true. Debate is impossible. Also, where did you get 'static' from? I didn't say that DNA is static. If it were, most, perhaps all, cancers would not exist. -- OOO - Own Opinions Only. Try www.jmwa.demon.co.uk and www.isce.org.uk 2006 is YMMVI- Your mileage may vary immensely. John Woodgate, J M Woodgate and Associates, Rayleigh, Essex UK
From: Paul Burke on 25 Aug 2006 04:41
John Larkin wrote: > If DNA is not alive, and everything is just polymers and static > blueprints, what is alive? Organisms are of course. What you're saying about DNA is like trying to take a watch apart to find the tick- it only ticks when the organisation is there. One of the problems of the 'lifew' debate is that we are working from a sample of one (Life As We Know It or LAWKI), with little knowledge of its earliest development (though plenty of speculation). Because LAWKI has been so successful on Earth, we can't find existing examples of alternative routes that could have been taken. This is one of the reasons planetary exploration is important. If we find traces of life on another planet, it will tell us an immense amount about life on Earth- if it turns out to be DNA based, panspermia wins, at least for our solar system. If it's otherwise, it will give us a clue as to the likely early precursors of LAWKI. And BTW DNA is no "blueprint", it's a recipe. There's a huge difference, try cooking a curry from a blueprint (though you could build a cathedral from a recipe). Paul Burke |