From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 1/16/2026 11:27 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   > On 17/01/2026 3:26 am, RonO wrote:   
   >> On 1/15/2026 7:27 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>> On 15/01/2026 3:01 pm, RonO wrote:   
   >>>> On 1/14/2026 7:49 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>> On 15/01/2026 12:41 pm, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>    
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Would this be an accurate assessment of where our discussion is at?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> With your position, you are in effect affirming the so-called   
   >>>>>> central dogma of biology, i.e. information flows sequentially from   
   >>>>>> DNA → RNA → protein, and not in reverse.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I'm suggesting instead something along the lines of Dennis Noble.   
   >>>>>> If I understand correctly, he accepts this biochemical pipeline,   
   >>>>>> but rejects that DNA is the primary or privileged source of   
   >>>>>> biological causation. Rather, he argues that biological systems   
   >>>>>> are causally bidirectional and distributed across multiple levels   
   >>>>>> of organisation.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> If Noble was shown to be right, would my logic then be valid?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> PS   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> AI summarises nicely why this matters:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> * Why This Is Devastating to Gene-Centric Darwinism   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Traditional Darwinism assumes:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Mutations in DNA → changes in proteins → changes in traits →   
   selection   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Noble shows that causation also runs:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> physiology → cellular state → chromatin structure → gene expression   
   >>>>> → mutation bias   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> So the genome is not an independent driver; it is embedded in a   
   >>>>> self- regulating system.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> This means:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Evolution does not act only on genes   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Development does not read a script   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Information is not stored only in DNA   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> The fertilized egg already contains a rich informational   
   >>>>> architecture that Darwinism never explains.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> This is just wrong about Darwinism if what is being claimed is just   
   >>>> evolution by natural selection.  Natural selection selects on the   
   >>>> whole organism.  Any genetic change has to work within the system   
   >>>> that is already working in order to produce an organism that has a   
   >>>> viable chance of being selected for.  This means that the genome has   
   >>>> never been an independent driver of natural selection.  Every   
   >>>> genetic change has to work with the existing cellular information in   
   >>>> order to correctly replicate and for the successful development of   
   >>>> an individual from a single fertilized egg cell.  This just means   
   >>>> that the genome has never been expected to be an independent driver   
   >>>> of biological evolution.  It has always been known that the genome   
   >>>> has to function in a functional cell.  If that is all Noble is   
   >>>> claiming then he isn't claiming much of anything that is going to   
   >>>> help you at all. All it means is that the ID perps and you are not   
   >>>> dealing with the information that you need to be dealing with, and   
   >>>> you will not be dealing with that information in any meaningful way   
   >>>> because you can't quantify it and you can't even identify what a lot   
   >>>> of it is.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>    
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Noble (and conventional biology, according to your assertion) say   
   >>> that "biological systems are causally bidirectional and distributed   
   >>> across multiple levels of organisation", i.e. the causal/control flow is   
   >>>   
   >>>     -> protein -> DNA -> mRNA ->   
   >>>    |                            |   
   >>>     --------------<-------------   
   >>>   
   >>> Regardless of evolution, "digital" information is stored in the DNA   
   >>> (and RNA), and "analogue" information is stored in the proteins (and   
   >>> cytoplasm, organelles, membrane, sugars etc).   
   >>   
   >> Why do you keep insisting that the information is digital?  Digital   
   >> programing was cooked up to transfer information, but life has it's   
   >> own information transfer system.  It is the chemistry and physical   
   >> properties of the matter involved.  That is what you are missing in   
   >> your protein to DNA to mRNA to protein scenario.  It is what makes the   
   >> cell, the literal structure and chemical make up of the cell, that the   
   >> DNA requires to replicate new cells and develop new types of cells.   
   >>   
   >>>   
   >>> Yes, DNA codes directly for proteins in a way that protein does not   
   >>> directly code for DNA, however, despite this, "DNA is not the primary   
   >>> or privileged source of biological causation".   
   >>   
   >> DNA does not directly code for protein, and protein does not directly   
   >> code for DNA. At this time life exists as cells.  The vast majority of   
   >> living things on earth are still microbial single cells.  Microbes   
   >> continue to be the greatest success story of life on earth.  Humans   
   >> continue to house more microbes than human cells for every human body.   
   >> It is why I have joked about the designer being really ticked off when   
   >> he comes back and finds that some rogue lifeform is using soap,   
   >> disinfectants and antibiotics to kill trillions of his beloved   
   >> microbes every minute of the day.  The designer may have thought that   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)