Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Space and Astronomy > General Science
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 30-September-2005, 05:43 PM
ToSeek's Avatar
ToSeek ToSeek is offline
Vulcan Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Greenbelt, MD
Posts: 24,320
Default Novel Mechanism For DNA Replication Discovered

Novel Mechanism For DNA Replication Discovered

Quote:
Since the discovery of the structure of DNA by James Watson and Francis Crick in 1953, the paradigm for DNA replication has stated that the DNA itself codes for the appropriate pairings for replication. In other words, if a guanine base is on the original strand of DNA then its partner, a cytosine base, will pair to it on the replicated strand. In a study published in this week's issue of Science, researchers from Mount Sinai School of Medicine report on the first instance in which a protein, rather than the DNA, provides the coding information.
I think this is particularly interesting considering that one of the arguments of creationists involves claiming DNA is the only way of coding genetic information.
__________________
Everything I need to know I learned through Googling.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 05-December-2005, 04:52 PM
jkmccrann jkmccrann is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,291
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToSeek
Novel Mechanism For DNA Replication Discovered



I think this is particularly interesting considering that one of the arguments of creationists involves claiming DNA is the only way of coding genetic information.
Creationists really say that? To me, mixing science (or pseudo-science) to back up one's faith-based claims is a fool's endeavour. How can you pick and choose which bits of scientific theory you're going to attach to what you're saying to back up your chosen theory? Rings false to me.
__________________
BugMeNot A portal to bypass free-site registration.

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident." Arthur Schopenhauer - renowned 19th Century German philosopher.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 05-December-2005, 09:14 PM
archman's Avatar
archman archman is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: texas
Posts: 442
Default

RNA can also code, and an early form is generally thought to be the "prototype" for DNA.

Creationists believe in DNA? I thought they merely accepted certain aspects of it, grudgingly, after mountains and mountains of overwhelming evidence proved impossible to refute.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 09:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today