A Code Needs a Mind
If I had a notion to type <a href="http://www.piltdownsuperman.com/p/question-evolution-day.html"><b>Question Evolution Day</b></a>, most people would pay it no nevermind, though many would recognize it as HTML coding. In this text portion of the Weblog, it's only a curiosity and has little function. Putting it where it belongs, you see this link in bold type: Question Evolution Day.
Similarly, Samuel F.B. Morse came up with the first binary code that traveled over the "singing wires" of telegraph lines. Someone who knew that code would send messages to a a clerk who would decode them for the intended recipient. Savvy Native Americans as well as outlaws on the run would cut the lines to hinder communications so town folk couldn't call for help.
Languages are complex codes, and anyone with a lick of sense can understand that the words on this site, the HTML coding, the languages that we use in our interpersonal communications, are all the products of design. Amazingly, materialists think that language evolved, and our brains that designed languages are nothing more than neurochemical reactions. DNA is a language with intricate specified complexity. It makes heaps of sense to the recipients in living organisms, but not so much to those of us on the outside.
Similarly, Samuel F.B. Morse came up with the first binary code that traveled over the "singing wires" of telegraph lines. Someone who knew that code would send messages to a a clerk who would decode them for the intended recipient. Savvy Native Americans as well as outlaws on the run would cut the lines to hinder communications so town folk couldn't call for help.
Image credit: Pixabay / OpenClipartVectors (click link for large image) |
The presence of coded information systems inside living things is a perplexing conundrum for materialists. Biblical creationists of course see it as yet another example of how science supports belief in the Creator God of the Bible. Evolutionary scenarios of how symbolic language could arise through a naturalistic process must attempt to explain their origin without a mind. But is this reasonable based on what we know scientifically (observationally/experimentally) about coded information?To read the rest, use your mind that was designed by our Creator to click on the link that uses computer language to read, "Mind over matter — Why the idea of ‘in the beginning there was no mind’ is mindless". Also, you can see the video, "15 Questions for Evolutionists #2: How did the DNA code originate?"
. . .
In an atheistic evolutionist’s worldview there is no mind that created, just random genetic mutation guided by natural selection. The problem is that genetic mutation is the result of spelling mistakes within an already existing and replicating genetic code and natural selection can only ‘select’ preferential genetic information from within that pre-existing system. Neither of these processes can account for the origin of any symbolic coded language system themselves.
Here are three observations confirmed by science showing why coded genetic information cannot be the result of a ‘no mind’ process …