Rayburne Winsor: Renown physicist Paul Davies, certainly no friend to Creationists or Christians in general, has pointed out that the living cell would be more meaningfully equated to an incredibly powerful supercomputer, in his own words, "an information processing and replicating system of astonishingly complexity." He stated: "DNA is not a special life-giving molecule, but a general databank that transmits its own information using a mathematical code. Most of the workings of the cell are best described, not in terms of material stuff--hardware--but as information, or software," which as a naturalistic origin-of-life perspective.."leaves us with a curious conundrum. How did nature fabricate the world's first digital information processor—the original living cell—from the blind chaos of blundering molecules ? How did molecular hardware get to write its own software?"

A recent New Scientist article stated: "There is no doubt that the common ancestor possessed DNA, RNA and proteins, a universal genetic code, ribosomes (the protein-building factories), ATP, and a proton-powered enzyme for making ATP. The detailed mechanisms for reading off DNA and converting genes into proteins were also in place. In short, then, the last common ancestor of all life looks pretty much like a modern cell".

My reply: And evolutionists claim there is no evidence to believe in a superintelligent, All-wise, All-knowing, All powerful , Creator-God. No wonder God's word states that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God (1 Corinthians 3: 19). The problem is not evidence but, as one scientist said, they (evolutionists ) cannot allow God to get a foot in the door. Some educated people are ever learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth . God bless.

David Murray: Its called cell theory, its well explained, and you shouldn't talk about science when you dont know any

Rayburne Winsor
Rayburne Winsor David, stop acting like an idiot. That is how you come across to people reading this , because you don't have to be a scientist (are you one?) to understand what Paul Davies said above anymore than I have to be a mathematician to know that 2+2= 4. Honestly, I have heard all this crap before(nothing new) from atheists and Bible skeptics who think that the only avenue to determine truth is what can be understood by a naturalistic explanation. Naturalism does not explain the origin of life, the origin of sex, the origin of consciousness, the origin of love , the origin of morality . These may be "unsolved mysteries " to Richard Dawkins (who now knows better) but they are easily and most rationally and intelligently explained in God's Word.

David Murray: i dont care what atheists say, i care what science says and what DNA proves and what is a scientific theory you are ignorant of, cell theory
the origin of life is an ongoing study in several major universities and to try to talk about with no data in yet shows you are another idiot yelling at the wright brothers man will never fly
gods word says planets come before stars so its worth nothing to anyone with half a clue how the natural world works

Rayburne Winsor: But you do, right David. Typical proud, arrogant atheist response.
DNA, science and information theory (bio-informatics, the study of biological information) disproves "from the goo, through the zoo, to you, molecules to man" evolution. (see Gitt, W. ., 1997, In the Beginning was Information, CLV, Bielefeld, Germany and Truman, R. The problem of information for the theory of evolution: Has Dawkins really solved it? 1999; trueorigin.org/dawkinfo.asp).
trueorigin.org
- The Problem of Information -
- The Problem of Information -

(...)

Rayburne Winsor: Really? But you know better than God's Word (He is not one of little gods) . Right? God's Word has a name for you. Proverbs 14:1).