Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Meta-information

LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 2:33:24 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

No, no it doesn't.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.
HumbleThinker1
Posts: 144
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 12:53:22 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

Why not get science from actual science sites? There are plenty of laymen science sites about evolution like Berkeley's Evolution 101 that will easily equip you to see through the nonsense in creationist articles. Why are creationist articles presumed to be true, then the burden be placed on others to show that they are not? That they almost always misuse citations and/or don't cite any non-creationist sources should set your skepticism into overdrive.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 12:59:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 12:53:22 PM, HumbleThinker1 wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

Why not get science from actual science sites? There are plenty of laymen science sites about evolution like Berkeley's Evolution 101 that will easily equip you to see through the nonsense in creationist articles. Why are creationist articles presumed to be true, then the burden be placed on others to show that they are not? That they almost always misuse citations and/or don't cite any non-creationist sources should set your skepticism into overdrive.

OK, Mr scientist. Why don't you give us all the scientific explanation for meta information. Most of our DNA is a users manual that tells the cell how to read and use the gene coding information. Where did this users manual come from? The only explanation that makes any sense at all is that it was designed that way. Unless you have a better answer.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 1:44:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.

Do you even understand what I wrote? There is no change in the DNA! As an adult you can still produce the fetal hemoglobin.

Wow, denial is strong.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 2:40:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 1:44:02 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.

Do you even understand what I wrote? There is no change in the DNA! As an adult you can still produce the fetal hemoglobin.

Wow, denial is strong.

I was referring to Meta Information, which is what this post is about. You tried to change it to something else. How about answering the question? How do evolutionists explain meta information in our DNA. I'm really interested in how you might try to explain the inexplicable.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 9:59:55 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 2:40:47 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:44:02 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.

Do you even understand what I wrote? There is no change in the DNA! As an adult you can still produce the fetal hemoglobin.

Wow, denial is strong.

I was referring to Meta Information, which is what this post is about. You tried to change it to something else. How about answering the question? How do evolutionists explain meta information in our DNA. I'm really interested in how you might try to explain the inexplicable.

Give me the exact definition of meta-information. With the link to the credible source which says what it is. Do not link to you creationism site. REAL SCIENCE SOURCE PLEASE!!!

The fact is this so called meta-information is rubbish thought up by creationists to try prove something that does not even exist. This is why I pointed out the idiocy of the example given at your source which is used to explain the concept.
Haroush
Posts: 1,329
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 11:03:03 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 9:54:22 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:05:18 PM, Haroush wrote:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

http://www.arn.org...

http://phys.org...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

http://en.wikipedia.org...'s_Tale

These are credible sources. The rest are not according to your standards IAAAAHIW. Maybe you could at least check them out?

LOL.

Funny am I not?
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 3:01:11 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 9:59:55 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:40:47 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:44:02 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.

Do you even understand what I wrote? There is no change in the DNA! As an adult you can still produce the fetal hemoglobin.

Wow, denial is strong.

I was referring to Meta Information, which is what this post is about. You tried to change it to something else. How about answering the question? How do evolutionists explain meta information in our DNA. I'm really interested in how you might try to explain the inexplicable.

Give me the exact definition of meta-information. With the link to the credible source which says what it is. Do not link to you creationism site. REAL SCIENCE SOURCE PLEASE!!!

The fact is this so called meta-information is rubbish thought up by creationists to try prove something that does not even exist. This is why I pointed out the idiocy of the example given at your source which is used to explain the concept.

LOL! You don't even know what meta information is? Meta information is information about information. Take the recipe for a cake, for instance. It has a list of ingredients needed to make the cake. That's the information. Meta information is needed in order to know what to do with those ingredients. DNA is no different. The complexity of the cell is staggering. We are only beginning to scratch the surface of how they work. There are complex factories, churning out RNA strands, proteins and many other things that cells need to do what they do. They have sophisticated built in error checking. If an error is detected, the object in question is disassembled and the components recycled. All of these systems need information in order to function. So the majority of our DNA is meta information that tells the cell how to do it's job. Information does not come from nature. A computer program cannot arise from random processes. Neither can the information stored in DNA, which is an organic computer. A computer requires a programmer, whether it's the kind I just typed this reply on, or an organic computer, like DNA. That's a fact that evolutionists can't explain away.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 7:07:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 3:01:11 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 9:59:55 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:40:47 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:44:02 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.

Do you even understand what I wrote? There is no change in the DNA! As an adult you can still produce the fetal hemoglobin.

Wow, denial is strong.

I was referring to Meta Information, which is what this post is about. You tried to change it to something else. How about answering the question? How do evolutionists explain meta information in our DNA. I'm really interested in how you might try to explain the inexplicable.

Give me the exact definition of meta-information. With the link to the credible source which says what it is. Do not link to you creationism site. REAL SCIENCE SOURCE PLEASE!!!

The fact is this so called meta-information is rubbish thought up by creationists to try prove something that does not even exist. This is why I pointed out the idiocy of the example given at your source which is used to explain the concept.

LOL! You don't even know what meta information is? Meta information is information about information. Take the recipe for a cake, for instance. It has a list of ingredients needed to make the cake. That's the information. Meta information is needed in order to know what to do with those ingredients. DNA is no different. The complexity of the cell is staggering. We are only beginning to scratch the surface of how they work. There are complex factories, churning out RNA strands, proteins and many other things that cells need to do what they do. They have sophisticated built in error checking. If an error is detected, the object in question is disassembled and the components recycled. All of these systems need information in order to function. So the majority of our DNA is meta information that tells the cell how to do it's job. Information does not come from nature. A computer program cannot arise from random processes. Neither can the information stored in DNA, which is an organic computer. A computer requires a programmer, whether it's the kind I just typed this reply on, or an organic computer, like DNA. That's a fact that evolutionists can't explain away.

Unanswered querstions:
Give me the exact definition of meta-information.

I pointed out the idiocy of the example given at your source. Yet you cannot disprove what I said. You cant give a definition. You cant answer anything. Because its creation bollocks.

Now you want me to explain the evolution of DNA? Then when I have done that, you will move on to the next ridiculous claim.

I am done wasting my time.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 2:20:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 7:07:43 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/22/2014 3:01:11 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 9:59:55 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:40:47 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:44:02 PM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:54:59 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:41:22 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:38:43 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/21/2014 2:33:52 AM, iamanatheistandthisiswhy wrote:
At 6/21/2014 1:52:33 AM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
Meta-information
An impossible conundrum for evolution

What do you think of this article? Does it change your mind about evolution?

http://creation.com...

And no I didn't read it.

What's the matter? Afraid of the truth? The fact that you didn't read it proves that you are close minded and will believe what you want, despite the evidence.

Honestly, everything I have ever read from creation.com has been pseudoscience. So it does not come with a good reputation. After reading the first paragraph I was amused as nothing was cited (besides self citation) for the hemoglobin example.

Now yes, this is true that fetal hemoglobin is replaced over a few months after birth and in some cases not (guess god is not so all powerful and wonderful going around killing babies?)

But its not, "For example, hemoglobin in human fetal blood contains a different combination of globins to that in post-natal blood." as it slowly gets changed in the babies body and is not a switch which this creationism seems to propose.

Do I need to read further, or can we say the creationists don't know what they are talking about, as it is still possible for an adult to produce fetal hemoglobin if the right genes are activated. Like in sickle cell treatment.

I believe they call this Epic Fail.

Do you even know what meta information is? There are at least 100 bits of meta information for every gene coding bit of information in our DNA. Meta information tells the cell how to use this information. Without this meta information, the cell would not function. So, in essence, each copy of our DNA comes with a users manual. How do evolutionists explain this users manual. Keep in mind that for evolution to work, every new bit of gene coding information would also need an addition to the users manual.

Do you even understand what I wrote? There is no change in the DNA! As an adult you can still produce the fetal hemoglobin.

Wow, denial is strong.

I was referring to Meta Information, which is what this post is about. You tried to change it to something else. How about answering the question? How do evolutionists explain meta information in our DNA. I'm really interested in how you might try to explain the inexplicable.

Give me the exact definition of meta-information. With the link to the credible source which says what it is. Do not link to you creationism site. REAL SCIENCE SOURCE PLEASE!!!

The fact is this so called meta-information is rubbish thought up by creationists to try prove something that does not even exist. This is why I pointed out the idiocy of the example given at your source which is used to explain the concept.

LOL! You don't even know what meta information is? Meta information is information about information. Take the recipe for a cake, for instance. It has a list of ingredients needed to make the cake. That's the information. Meta information is needed in order to know what to do with those ingredients. DNA is no different. The complexity of the cell is staggering. We are only beginning to scratch the surface of how they work. There are complex factories, churning out RNA strands, proteins and many other things that cells need to do what they do. They have sophisticated built in error checking. If an error is detected, the object in question is disassembled and the components recycled. All of these systems need information in order to function. So the majority of our DNA is meta information that tells the cell how to do it's job. Information does not come from nature. A computer program cannot arise from random processes. Neither can the information stored in DNA, which is an organic computer. A computer requires a programmer, whether it's the kind I just typed this reply on, or an organic computer, like DNA. That's a fact that evolutionists can't explain away.

Unanswered querstions:
Give me the exact definition of meta-information.

I pointed out the idiocy of the example given at your source. Yet you cannot disprove what I said. You cant give a definition. You cant answer anything. Because its creation bollocks.

Now you want me to explain the evolution of DNA? Then when I have done that, you will move on to the next ridiculous claim.

I am done wasting my time.

I gave you a definition. Meta information is information about information. It is not something Creationists came up with. You're just trying to dodge the issue. The fact is that DNA contains instructions on how to use the gene coding portions of itself. These instructions are information. Information does not come from nature. It requires intelligence for it's very existence. So, tell me. Where did this information come from? I am finished wasting my time with YOU! Ignorance can be excused, but you are willfully ignorant. And that's inexcusable.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 3:38:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Without even wading through this meta-information crap I can already tell that this is an argument from ignorance.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
Enji
Posts: 1,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 4:15:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 2:20:28 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:

I gave you a definition. Meta information is information about information. It is not something Creationists came up with. You're just trying to dodge the issue. The fact is that DNA contains instructions on how to use the gene coding portions of itself. These instructions are information. Information does not come from nature. It requires intelligence for it's very existence. So, tell me. Where did this information come from? I am finished wasting my time with YOU! Ignorance can be excused, but you are willfully ignorant. And that's inexcusable.

If this is your claim, then you don't even need to bother with presenting meta-information.

Mind you, the way Creationists interpret information is something Creationists came up with; scientists usually consider information theory as presented by Claude Shannon, and in this sense information means something very different from how you are using it.
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 4:21:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 3:38:47 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Without even wading through this meta-information crap I can already tell that this is an argument from ignorance.

In THIS case, information is a incredibly complex set of instructions that tell a cell where, when and how to do things. Just as a modern computer needs programming to operate, so does a cell. A computer program cannot write itself. So why do you believe that the programming of DNA somehow wrote itself? Information cannot come from natural processes. It requires an intelligent designer. This is a fact that evolutionists conveniently ignore.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 5:17:15 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 4:21:06 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/22/2014 3:38:47 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Without even wading through this meta-information crap I can already tell that this is an argument from ignorance.

In THIS case, information is a incredibly complex set of instructions that tell a cell where, when and how to do things. Just as a modern computer needs programming to operate, so does a cell. A computer program cannot write itself. So why do you believe that the programming of DNA somehow wrote itself? Information cannot come from natural processes. It requires an intelligent designer. This is a fact that evolutionists conveniently ignore.

I don't know, show that an intelligent designer designed our biology, without resorting to "it can't have been done any other way"? How do you define information?
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
LittleBallofHATE
Posts: 284
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 5:42:53 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 5:17:15 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 6/22/2014 4:21:06 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/22/2014 3:38:47 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Without even wading through this meta-information crap I can already tell that this is an argument from ignorance.

In THIS case, information is a incredibly complex set of instructions that tell a cell where, when and how to do things. Just as a modern computer needs programming to operate, so does a cell. A computer program cannot write itself. So why do you believe that the programming of DNA somehow wrote itself? Information cannot come from natural processes. It requires an intelligent designer. This is a fact that evolutionists conveniently ignore.

I don't know, show that an intelligent designer designed our biology, without resorting to "it can't have been done any other way"? How do you define information?

Information- noun
b : the attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something (as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects.

DNA contains information. It is read and acted upon. It produces effects. Just like a computer. Where did this information come from, if not a designer? Did it all just magically appear on it's own? Do you really believe that? Then you probably believe that World of Warcraft is a random collection of ones and zeros.
I would agree with you, but then we'd BOTH be wrong.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 5:46:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/22/2014 5:42:53 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/22/2014 5:17:15 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
At 6/22/2014 4:21:06 PM, LittleBallofHATE wrote:
At 6/22/2014 3:38:47 PM, AlbinoBunny wrote:
Without even wading through this meta-information crap I can already tell that this is an argument from ignorance.

In THIS case, information is a incredibly complex set of instructions that tell a cell where, when and how to do things. Just as a modern computer needs programming to operate, so does a cell. A computer program cannot write itself. So why do you believe that the programming of DNA somehow wrote itself? Information cannot come from natural processes. It requires an intelligent designer. This is a fact that evolutionists conveniently ignore.

I don't know, show that an intelligent designer designed our biology, without resorting to "it can't have been done any other way"? How do you define information?

Information- noun
b : the attribute inherent in and communicated by one of two or more alternative sequences or arrangements of something (as nucleotides in DNA or binary digits in a computer program) that produce specific effects.

DNA contains information. It is read and acted upon. It produces effects. Just like a computer. Where did this information come from, if not a designer? Did it all just magically appear on it's own?

I don't believe in magic.

Do you really believe that? Then you probably believe that World of Warcraft is a random collection of ones and zeros.

I don't see the connection.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
Posts: 720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/22/2014 7:37:10 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I have tried to debate LittleBallofHate before about evolution. Unfortunately he does not understand the definition of evolution.
http://www.debate.org...

As such everyone here is wasting there time.