• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Are ''duons'' or ''dual coded genes'' evidence for an intelligent designer?

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Determinism doesn't explain away the complexity of duons, it just presumes a deterministic cause without explaining the ''how''. How would you scientifically explain the deterministic evolution of ''dual coded genes''?
Even if we have no explanation currently, that doesn't get you any closer to establishing the existence of an intelligent designer. In order to do that, you have to actually produce evidence that the designer exists. Simply saying, "we don't know how x happened, therefore an intelligent designer must have done it," is called an argument from ignorance. It's a logical fallacy.
 

Mart

New Member
Even if we have no explanation currently, that doesn't get you any closer to establishing the existence of an intelligent designer. In order to do that, you have to actually produce evidence that the designer exists. Simply saying, "we don't know how x happened, therefore an intelligent designer must have done it," is called an argument from ignorance. It's a logical fallacy.
If it's virtually impossible that dual coded genes came into existence accidentally, then what's the alternative? What instrument does the evolution theory have to its disposal to create dual coded genes?
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
If it's virtually impossible that dual coded genes came into existence accidentally, then what's the alternative? What instrument does the evolution theory have to its disposal to create dual coded genes?
My point is, even if evolutionary theory is completely and utterly incapable of explaining this phenomenon, it doesn't get you one inch closer to demonstrating the existence of an intelligent designer.
 

tayla

My dog's name is Tayla
Are ''duons'' or ''dual coded genes'' evidence for an intelligent designer?
Those who reject intelligent design (because they reject everything non-physical) will find a physical explanation for everything. In my view, there are many many many many things in biology (even apart from irreducible complexity) that seem to beg for an intelligent designer.

They object that a sentient being from the spiritual realm can't affect physical objects, but there is a way: by choosing which "random" possibility to take upon quantum mechanics wavefunction collapse. A butterfly flapping its wings in the Himalaya's can cause a hurricane in the Caribbean, and an electron appearing on this side of an atom instead of the other can result in a mutation which natural selection allows to propagate.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
Those who reject intelligent design (because they reject everything non-physical) will find a physical explanation for everything. In my view, there are many many many many things in biology (even apart from irreducible complexity) that seem to beg for an intelligent designer.

They object that a sentient being from the spiritual realm can't affect physical objects, but there is a way: by choosing which "random" possibility to take upon quantum mechanics wavefunction collapse. A butterfly flapping its wings in the Himalaya's can cause a hurricane in the Caribbean, and an electron appearing on this side of an atom instead of the other can result in a mutation which natural selection allows to propagate.
If your God's actions are indistinguishable from random quantum fluctuations, then by definition there is no rational way to conclude that your God does anything at all.
 

tayla

My dog's name is Tayla
If your God's actions are indistinguishable from random quantum fluctuations, then by definition there is no rational way to conclude that your God does anything at all.
They are distinguishable from randomness. No one has bothered to look to see if the coin lands as HTHTHTHTHTHTHTHTHTHT or HTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTH: each of these is 50% heads.

And possibly it can't ever be seen. If the true random events occur 99.999999% of the time, the small percentage of guided events can't be detected, especially if there is always a corresponding opposite outcome to keep the probabilities in synch. Only certain key events require guidance; the others can be random by default.

I agree that there is no other possible way for a spirit being to interact with the universe. All the other kinds of explanations of miracles should be rejected as not possible.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
They are distinguishable from randomness. No one has bothered to look to see if the coin lands as HTHTHTHTHTHTHTHTHTHT or HTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTHHTTHTH: each of these is 50% heads.

And possibly it can't ever be seen
. If the true random events occur 99.999999% of the time, the small percentage of guided events can't be detected, especially if there is always a corresponding opposite outcome to keep the probabilities in synch. Only certain key events require guidance; the others can be random by default.

I agree that there is no other possible way for a spirit being to interact with the universe. All the other kinds of explanations of miracles should be rejected as not possible.
You're saying they can be distinguished, but then you go on to explain that actually they can't. o_O
 

Mart

New Member
You're saying they can be distinguished, but then you go on to explain that actually they can't. o_O
It's like a cloud formation writing: ''Hello guys, it's Me writing, but you'll never believe Me, since you say My actions are indistinguishable from random quantum fluctuations, so there is no rational way to conclude I do anything at all :)''. Almost impossible by chance, but admitted: almost impossible is not impossible.
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
It's like a cloud formation writing: ''Hello guys, it's Me writing, but you'll never believe Me, since you say My actions are indistinguishable from random quantum fluctuations, so there is no rational way to conclude I do anything at all :)''.
First of all, I didn't say that, a theist did. I was just commenting on his own views.

But second of all, when your God actually writes that in the clouds, let me know. Heck, why doesn't your God just come down here right now and settle all this?

Almost impossible by chance, but admitted: almost impossible is not impossible.
You're still stuck on the same false dichotomy. Chance and intelligence are not the only two possibilities. Don't know how many different ways I can explain it.
 

Mart

New Member
You're still stuck on the same false dichotomy. Chance and intelligence are not the only two possibilities. Don't know how many different ways I can explain it.
I'm an agnostic on the issue, but if it isn't by chance, how does the theory of evolution explain the existence of dual coded genes? Be specific, please: what are those possibilities you're hinting at?
 

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
I'm an agnostic on the issue, but if it isn't by chance, how does the theory of evolution explain the existence of dual coded genes? Be specific, please: what are those possibilities you're hinting at?
I don't need to be specific. Even if the theory of evolution is completely wrong, it is possible that there is an explanation, maybe even one we haven't discovered yet, for the phenomenon that is neither intelligent nor random. All that not having an explanation means is - we don't know. But you can't just fill your God in for whatever stuff in the world we don't have an explanation for. That's an argument from ignorance, which is a fallacy.
 

Brickjectivity

Turned to Stone. Now I stretch daily.
Staff member
Premium Member
What do duons suggest? Duons are the fact that a piece of DNA can have multiple uses. If it has multiple uses its a duon. That fits evolutionary theory just fine. What it doesn't fit are previous assumptions used in some papers about statistical inference from genetics, and those papers and all the papers that cited them will need to be revisited, possibly changed but probably replaced or unused.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
Determinism doesn't explain away the complexity of duons, it just presumes a deterministic cause without explaining the ''how''. How would you scientifically explain the deterministic evolution of ''dual coded genes''?
Simple it gave an adaptive advantage as predicted with natural selection. Nothing else needed including an unprovable intelligent designer than has to constantly but fixing the genetic code to create different species.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I wonder who told you, & what the argument is against natural origins.
We often here claims here made with great certainty, but the claimants
don't show their reasoning & calculations. Too often, it boils down to
a mere argument of incredulity.
Dang it...."hear", not "here".
(Can't edit it anymore.)
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Hi all.
I'm new here, living in Spain and looking for evolutionist answers for something called ''duons'' or ''dual coded genes''. I've been told that coincidence can be excluded: it's entirely impossible that dual coded genes came into existence accidentally, therefore intelligence must have been involved. I'm not an expert, so I was wondering what your thoughts are on this matter.

Thanks!
Do they truly make such a claim?

That is really impressive.

If anything, the existence of duons is indicative of how chaotic the origins of DNA are.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
First of all, dual coding is known in virus genomes, where there is a strong size constraint. This is selected for in such circumstances because of that size constraint. As I recall, there is even an example of *triple* coding.

We also know that there examples of double coding in humans. These tend to happen in genes that are not transcribed frequently and thereby have less selective pressure on them. Also, one of the reading frames is transcribed much more frequently than the other.

Now, why this is evidence for ID is unclear. Given the wide variety of ways that transcipription is moderated (including different transcription start points and splicing), it isn't too much of a surprise when more than one frame appears in a stretch of DNA. If both frames encode useful proteins, such would stay around.
 

Bear Wild

Well-Known Member
First of all, dual coding is known in virus genomes, where there is a strong size constraint. This is selected for in such circumstances because of that size constraint. As I recall, there is even an example of *triple* coding.

We also know that there examples of double coding in humans. These tend to happen in genes that are not transcribed frequently and thereby have less selective pressure on them. Also, one of the reading frames is transcribed much more frequently than the other.

Now, why this is evidence for ID is unclear. Given the wide variety of ways that transcipription is moderated (including different transcription start points and splicing), it isn't too much of a surprise when more than one frame appears in a stretch of DNA. If both frames encode useful proteins, such would stay around.

This is a very fascinating aspect of genetics occurring on some very conserved genes. Found an interesting article evaluating the dual role gene sequences with the authors concluding that they are explained by natural selection and consistent with evolution.

“our results indicate that simultaneous encoding of amino acid and regulatory information within exons is a major functional feature of complex genomes. The information architecture of the received genetic code is optimized for superimposition of additional information (34, 35), and this intrinsic flexibility has been extensively exploited by natural selection.”

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3967546/

Stergachis, Andrew B. et all. 2013. Exonic transcription factor binding directs codon choice and impacts protein evolution Science. 2013 Dec 13; 342(6164): 1367–1372.
 

tas8831

Well-Known Member
Those who reject intelligent design (because they reject everything non-physical) will find a physical explanation for everything. In my view, there are many many many many things in biology (even apart from irreducible complexity) that seem to beg for an intelligent designer.

If, as you write, 'Those who reject intelligent design...will find a physical explanation for everything', then it seems logical that these things have physical explanations and your farcical notions about middle eastern deities are not needed.
They object that a sentient being from the spiritual realm can't affect physical objects
That may be one objection, but a more common one is that there is no evidence for such beings.
Got any?
, but there is a way: by choosing which "random" possibility to take upon quantum mechanics wavefunction collapse. A butterfly flapping its wings in the Himalaya's can cause a hurricane in the Caribbean, and an electron appearing on this side of an atom instead of the other can result in a mutation which natural selection allows to propagate.
Wow, cool and scientifically valid and logical insights, bro! That is TOTALLY how we operate!:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
Top