Why Neither “Extreme” Can Take Science Literally

A blog reader named Nelson Hernandez said:

There isn’t code in DNA. Those are just letters we give chemical interactions to be able to talk about them. There isn’t a code in DNA. That’s like saying there is a code in the rain/water cycle. Nonsense.

Nelson,

There’s a guy who often comments on this site, his name is Tom Godfrey. He is a young earth creationist. He believes the universe is 6000 years old and only “looks billions of years old.” He says that science cannot be used to determine history, only the Bible.

Nobody but young earth creationists ever says this. Because the YEC worldview forbids people from thinking otherwise.

You believe that DNA only “looks like a code”. You insist code is only a convenient way humans use to describe it, but it’s not really code. My experience is, only atheists say this. Because the atheist worldview forbids people thinking otherwise.

What’s the difference between a YEC who thinks the age of the earth is an illusion and an atheist who thinks the genetic code is an illusion?

Have not both camps invented their own version of science in order to avoid what would otherwise be painfully obvious?

Just to be clear, I’m not asserting that there’s no possible naturalistic explanation for the genetic code. I’ve got a $5 million prize for anyone who can figure it out. http://www.naturalcode.org.

And we don’t even have to argue about whether it’s a code or not. All you need is something that “looks like a code” and you’ll win the money.

Leave a Reply

You must use your real first and last name. Anonymity is not allowed.
Your email address will not be published.
Required fields are marked *