DNA - it had to be Intelligent Design

DNA - it had to be Intelligent Design


Intro

For a 'living' cell to pass its evolution on to future generations - it needs genetic material either in the form of DNA or RNA. Without genetic material, no progress can be passed on to the future generations. Your DNA contains all information necesairy for your body, it contains the blueprints of how things should be build such as your physical attributes (i.e. hair colour, eye colour etc. to how tall you would be, and some say - even how old your body can possibly age). Without these blueprints it's impossible for a body to be formed, a child to grow up. If any life form would suddenly and randomly appear without such a blueprint, it would not be able to copy itself, or to have offspring without any such guidelines. Therefore in order to preserve life, and pass down biological information, lifeforms must contain this genetic material.

DNA and RNA are both strands made of nucleotides. The difference is, that RNA is a single strand whereas DNA are two strands of nucleotides coiled together. Now for these strands to "fit" into one another, the right nucleotides need to be paired up. We call these paired up nucleotides from the two strands of DNA "base-pairs". Some other small differences, RNA does not use Thymine as one of the 4 nucleotides but uses Uracil instead. DNA uses deoxyribose instead of ribose.

DNA is the most common genetic material found inside the cells of plants & animals. RNA can be found in different places, it can be the genetic material of a virus. RNA is also used in our body to carry information (a transcript of a part of our DNA) to other places in the cell.


Being Made

DNA is made up of thousands of different genes, and genes are made up of base pairs. These "base pairs" are made of two paired up nucleotides. In other to form a base pair, we need to pair up specific nucleotides. Each type of nucleotide has a specific shape, so only certain combinations fit. There are 4 nucleotides. Adenine, Thymine, Guanine and Cytosine represented respectivly by the letters A,T,G and C. Due to their shapes only A and T or G and C fit into one another.

In regard to genetic material being formed out of natural processes; some might claim that genetic material was formed in chains naturally. However there is a whole bunch of objections to that idea. Fist of all the basic building blocks, neucleotides don't form spontaniously. Secondly they don't pair up to form base pairs correctly just like that either. And finally even if you could explain the previous two steps, it still wouldn't be a linear strand, but more probably a chaotic and branched strand. Finally, another problem is that they wouldn't for msuch long strands, and a short chain can only hold a very limited amount of information.



Base Pairs [A-T, G-C] (billions of these matching pairs*)] ---> Genes (thousands of these*) --> DNA --> Chromosomes* --> Nucleotides --> Nucleus (the 'brain' of the cell).

--> = come together to make up... [i.e. Base Pairs --> (combine to make Genes etc.)]



*(The haploid human genome (23 chromosomes) is estimated to be about 3 billion base pairs long and to contain 20,000-25,000 distinct genes.^[1])

[1]International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium (2004). "Finishing the euchromatic sequence of the human genome". Nature 431 (7011): 931–45. doi:10.1038/nature03001. PMID 15496913. [1]



Connecting

Now since these nucleotides need to connect with each other to form base pairs, they have to do this thousands and millions of times - in the correct sequencing - in order for them to become useful genes. So millions of different A nucleotides will have to connect with millions of T nucleotides, and millions of G nucleotides have to connect with millions of C nucleotides. These combined will make our genes. One gene might contain any number from a small dozen up to thousands of nucleotides connected together into base-pairs, so there will be millions of nucleotides connected together in the matching sequences in the DNA.



Connecting two strands to make DNA

Since DNA is made up of two strands, proponents of the RNA world suggest that somewhere along evolution DNA was formed by merging two RNA strands toghether.

Now for two strands to connect - not only would they have to have approximately the same size, the nucleotides should also have to match up correctly. I.e. the A from one strand would have to connect with a T nucleotide from the other strand, and a G nucleotide to connect with a C nucleotide from the other strand. If we take two RNA strands with a million nucleotides, the probability of all nucleotides pairing up correctly would be 4^1million (four to the power of one million). Whereas in mathematics probability, In practice, probabilities smaller than 1 over 10 to the power of 50 [50 zeros after it] are thought of as "zero probability" Even if they were to argue that the chains were much smaller in the earlier days, the probability of this happening are still high (reaching to the mathematical probability of impossibility of such a thing happening.)

Right handed and left handed isomers - right handed only being useful for nucleotides:

Theres something else which is interesting aswell;

There are two types of nucleotides, left handed and right handed (isomers) [Imagine your left hand and right hand - they're the same - but the total mirror opposite of each other]. Someone can argue that yes, left handed ones were only present and this is why there was no harm in nucleotides coming together to form into the correct genes. The problem is though that even if they could show how nucleotides could form natuarally (which they can't) then both left handed as well as right handed nucleotide isomers would have produced equally. (Search Racemic mixture) [Pasteur concluded that organic molecules can exist in one of two forms, called isomers (that is, having the same structure and differing only in mirror images of each other), which he referred to as "left-handed" and "right-handed" forms. When chemists synthesize an organic compound, both of these forms are produced in equal proportions, canceling each other's optical effects.] - Term Paper on Biology. Essays, Research Papers on Bacteria -research material v. II,I

The nucleotides which make up our DNA are exclusively made up of right handed isomers [of nucleotides], and no left handed isomers. The same problem exists for our proteins. The proteins are made up of amino acids which are all made out of left handed isomers.

So ALL the nucleotides which connect to make the DNA - would have to be left handed only, in order for it to be useful DNA, otherwise the process would have to start all over again (of producing a chain of nucleotides which is left handed only).

Its like tossing a coin 1000 times and it always landing on heads only. Would you say this is because of chance, or purposely controlled by someone with an Intelligence?



DNA needs to pass its genes on to future generations, but how?

Finally, even if for arguments sake DNA was to form, it would need to reproduce itself or it'd eventually end up being destroyed by the chaotic atmosphere. Replication is a vital part of evolution, without replication no advancement can be saved. For this it would need protein organelles, preferably kept together with our DNA by a cell membrane. The problem is though, DNA by itself can't do anything - it's just a Blueprint, or a set of instructions. So even if amino acids were present (based on Millers study some were produced), how did the amino acids know what to do? (Millers experiment does not explain how amino acids come together to form proteins and there is no successful study to show that this has actually ever occurred.)

To make a comparison, Imagine a factory with car parts (amino acids) laying around scattered, and some blueprints (dna/rna) laying inbetween them, and whole whole bunch of other random and even harmfull stuff. Would such an enviroment naturally produce a car? Everyone would agree you need factory workers [protein organelles and enzymes] who can sit within a factory (a cell membrane) and get their instructions from the DNA. The problem is though, that a simple cell membrane is made up of lipids (fat) only, so it can't open and close (like floodgates) at its own will unless it has a system within it [telling the different components what to do, and when to open up or close]. Fat/lipids by themselves aren't able to do this. So how did the DNA enter into this cell membrane in the first place, and how did any organelles enter into this cell membrane - so that they could work together to be productive in reproducing themselves on to future generations?



http://www.islamic-life.com/forums/atheism-agnosticism/abdul-fattah-request-proof-read-dna-article-1815/

Intelligent Design - Unlocking The Mysteries Of Life [video documentary[

Intelligent Design - Unlocking The Mysteries Of Life

A thoughtful and well presented argument for a turn away from the dry/rationalist argument that the miracle of life is a "nothing but" - scientifically explained foregone conclusion. Their is "intelligence" behind the design.

watch here;
http://video.google.com/videosearch?...fe&emb=0&aq=f#


more:
http://islamicmultimedia.blogspot.com/

Agnosticism is the middle point in debate, not atheism

When you're in debate, especially with atheists about different topics - you need a starting point.


They will say that the starting point of the debate is that there is no God, so you have to prove that there is one in order to convince them.




But this isn't true at all:

Some will even claim atheism isn't even a paradigm but the default starting position. They are obviously wrong, Agnosticism (believing in a God) is the default starting position. Atheism is negatively biased towards the existence of God whereas theism (relligion) is positively biased.


The difference is, at least the theists acknowledges that their view is a belief.

[MOD EDIT: No outside links allowed]

[This is A Muslim site who is an ex-atheist - he has some really good articles mashaAllah.]

That's a really good point to make, since the person who believes in God knows and says that they know they require faith to believe that He [God] exists.

From there, all you need to do then is to explain why you feel Islam is the correct religion from all the rest. Since the default starting point in the debate is agnosticism, not atheism.

Murder, Rape and Circumcision

The punishment for rape is death to the one who performed the act of rape;

The punishment thereto (for rape) is death by execution. He will not be entitled to any pardon or reprieve whatsoever, regardless of whether he was single or married.

The one who forces sex upon someone else under threat of death is an evil and vile member of the society and should be purged. He is involved in an act of open violence and transgression against others and the spread of mischief throughout the land. His is the fate of bandits and highway robbers:

(...)


A woman will not be punished if there is any reason to believe that she was forced into the act. The least evidence in this regard will be sufficient to save the woman from punishment. Our Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “Allah has pardoned my people for the acts they do by mistake, due to forgetfulness, and what they are coerced into doing” [Related by Ibn Mâjah and authenticated by al-Nawawî, Ibn Hajr, and al-Albânî].

Also, it was related by Ibn Abî Shaybah through Târiq b. Shahâb that a woman accused of adultery was taken to Caliph `Umar. The woman pleaded that she was asleep and woke up to find the man over her. `Umar released the woman. [The narration was approved by al-Albâni]. Ibn Qudâmah stated in his book al-Mughnî: “There is no punishment on the woman who was coerced into adultery.”

Islamtoday.Com - Punishment for rape

Furthermore, Allah tells us in the Qur'an;

No burdened person (with sins) shall bear the burden (sins) of another [Qur'an al Najm 52:28]


So no woman will be responsible for the sin of another man.




Islam preserves life, and that is one of the principles of Shari'ah [Islamic law].
5. Islam prohibits the taking of human life, whether that life be one’s own or that of someone else.

Allah says:

Do not kill yourselves. Verily Allah is to you Most Merciful.[Qur'an 4:29]

The crime of murder is deplorable, so much so that taking one life is considered equivalent to killing all of mankind. Allah says:

Whoever kills a person, not in retaliation for murder or iniquity in the Earth, then it would be as if he killed all of mankind.[Qur'an 5:32]

Allah also says:

Do not kill a person whose life Allah has made sacred except in the dispensation of justice.

He says:

Whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, abiding therein. Allah’s wrath is upon him, and His curse; and He has prepared for him a great punishment.

In an authentic hadîth, it is related that Allah’s Messenger (peace be upon him) said:

Whoever kills someone who has a covenant with us will never smell the fragrance of Paradise.

Islamtoday.Com



Islamtoday.com: Female Circumcision & Islam

Banu Qurayzah

The ironic thing about the issue of Banu Qurayzah is that the rule applied to them was their own law in the Bible, Old Testament (i.e. In Numbers 31: 7-10, 31:13-15 & Deuteronomy 20: 10-14).

So they faced the punishment of their own Prophet, and they chose the person who would decide their punishment for them (Sa'ad ibn Mu'aadh).


Women after Invasion of Bani Quraizah


Those who were men from the banu Quraydhah and supported the treason against the Muslims, and planned to kill them all (the muslims) during the warfare when the Ahzab [confederates, 10,000 of them surrounded the Muslims (who were only 3000 in number)] - them Jews were executed.

This was approved of by Prophet Muhammad too, because the punishment is equal to the crime.


Those who said that they did not want to get involved in harming the Muslims from among the Banu Quraydhah, they did not get beheaded. Some even became Muslims willingly.

Ibn Ishaq quotes another descendant of Qurayza, ‘Attiyya13 by name, who had been spared, and, directly, a certain descendant of al-Zabir b. Bata, a prominent member of the tribe of Qurayza who figures in the narrative.

(13). Sira, 691-2/II, 242, 244; `Uyun al-athar, II, 74, 75.

http://jews-for-allah.org/2009/03/04/did-prophet-muhammad-order-900-jews-killed/#more-50

The Jews of Arab Lands: A History ... - Google Book Search

The Jizyah – A Tax on Non-Muslims?

The Jizyah – A Tax on Non-Muslims?| Prepared by the research committee of IslamToday.net |
Allah says: “They pay the jizyah by hand in a condition of submission.” [from Sûrah al-Tawbah: 29] This is the verse that establishes the jizyah – a tax that is paid by non-Muslims who live as citizens in the Muslim state. There is considerable confusion among people as to what the jizyah is all about and why only non-Muslims have to pay it. This article seeks to address the nature of the jizyah, the reasons for it, and the rationale behind it. Looking at the Phrase: Some people feel that the words “in a condition of submission” mean that the jizyah is some sort of punishment or humiliation for the non-Muslim citizens. This is a misreading of the verse and a common misunderstanding held by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The words in Arabic are: “yu`tû al-jizyata `an yadin wa hum sâghirûn”. “yu`tû al-jizyata” = they pay the jizyah “`an yadin” = roughly translated: from hand to hand. The word “yad” in Arabic is often used to mean power or ability. Essentially, it means here that what they have to pay is something that is within their capacity to pay. “wa hum sâghirûn” = “in a condition of submission” The phrase “wa hum sâghirûn” is an adverbial clause. It is specifically a “hâl” – a part of speech that refers to the circumstances of the subject or object of the verb while the action of the verb is taking place. The particle “wa” here is called “wâw al-hâl”. In Arabic grammar, this is a particle that turns the full sentence that comes after it into an adverbial clause depicting the circumstance of the action. The word sâghir means “meek” or “subdued”. What this means is that the non-Muslim citizens of the state are subordinate to the state and not in an act of opposition or rebellion against it. This means that these non-Muslims are paying the tax that is due upon them in a framework of obedience to, and recognition of, the state wherein they are full citizens. The Nature of Jizyah Non-Muslims live in the Muslim state as citizens under a contractual agreement (dhimmah) whereby they pay the jizyah, a fixed annual levy, in lieu of two things: 1. Jizyah is paid in lieu of exemption from military service. Non-Muslim citizens receive the protection of the state, whereby they are allowed to live in peace and security, without being obliged to engage in any military service. The Muslims, by contrast, are required to engage in military service when they are called upon to do so. Historically, at times when the Muslim government could not afford protection from enemies to the non-Muslims living in the outlying regions of the Muslim state, this levy was returned to them. 2. Jizyah is paid in lieu of exmption from paying zakâh. In spite of the fact that, as citizens, they have full rights to receive assistance from the public treasury and to benefit from public services and public works, non-Muslims are exempt from paying zakâh. By contrast, Muslims in the Muslim state must pay zakâh to the public treasury. Each of these two forms of taxation has economic advantages and disadvantages for those who have to pay it, which we can ascertain by making a comparison between them. First, we must understand that neither jizyah nor zakâh is a tax on income. Jizyah is a head tax levied as a fixed sum upon each taxable individual. Zakâh is a tax on savings, levied upon the money that is kept in savings by a Muslim. The jizyah is paid annually as a fixed sum of money levied upon each free, adult male citizen. No jizyah is paid by or on behalf of a child, a woman, or a slave. A poor man who cannot afford to pay the jizyah is also exempt. It can be a graduated tax, whereby the very poor pay nothing, the lower class pays little, the middle-class pays more, and the wealthy pay the most. However, each grade is still a fixed limit. We can contrast this with zakâh. The zakâh on monetary wealth is 2.5% of all savings retained for a year. A Muslim who has little or no savings will pay little or no Zakâh, regardless of how well-off he or she might otherwise be. (No Muslim who possesses savings is exempt, not even a child.) However, a Muslim who possesses considerable savings has a very heavy annual tax burden, many times in excess of the jizyah that any non-Muslim citizen would have to pay, and regardless of the Muslim’s annual income. From a purely economic perspective, the zakâh tax is economically favorable to someone who possesses little or no savings. Such a person will either pay nothing or very little, even if that person is affluent in his or her daily means. By contrast – and from the same purely economic perspective – zakâh is disadvantageous to a person who possesses a considerable amount of monetary wealth or is trying to amass investment capital over time. From the same perspective, the jizyah is disadvantageous to people of low income, since they have to pay the flat tax regardless of whether or not they enjoy a surplus. It is economically advantageous to those who have large capital savings or who are seeking to amass investment capital. This has, throughout history, provided non-Muslim citizens in the Muslim state with an economic advantage in business. They could amass huge amounts of investment capital as individuals or through corporations, all of which was tax-exempt. This is one reason why throughout Muslim history – and without exception – every Muslim country that had a Christian or Jewish community also had a very robust Christian or Jewish business sector. They were always the leaders in business and trade. We must keep in mind that it is Allah’s wisdom that He conferred this system of taxation upon the people. One possible aspect of the wisdom in this system is that, in this way, non-Muslims could always find prosperity in the Muslim state, even when they were in the minority, and therfore would be content and feel loyalty to their country. Also, in reality, there is no disadvantage to the Muslims for having to pay zakâh on their savings, since zakâh is an act of worship whereby the Muslim purifies his or her wealth – which is a gift and a trust from Allah. In doing so, the Muslim attains Allah’s pleasure and receives increase in both this world and the Hereafter from whence he or she cannot fathom. There is also the inestimable satisfaction of doing a good deed that is absent from the payment of other forms of taxation. The Rights of non-Muslim Citizens The non-Muslims who pay the jizyah – as well as those non-Muslim citizens who are exempt from paying it for whatever reason – are all full citizens of the Muslim country. Their rights, their lives, their property, and their honor are inviolable. They have the right to employment, education, and to freely engage in commerce. They can, and historically often did, hold high-level government posts. They cannot, however, hold a government post that would put them in charge of the religious affairs of the Muslims. For instance, a non-Muslim cannot be Minister of Islamic Endowments in charge of the mosques. Non-Muslim citizens have the right to practice their religion among themselves as they like without molestation, provided they do not call Muslims to it. They have the right to have civil courts under their own religious jurisdiction to handle affairs such as marriage, divorce, inheritance, and disputes among themselves. However, they must abide by the criminal code of the Muslims, except in a few matters. They are allowed to engage in those matters deemed lawful in their religion that are unlawful in Islam, like the consumption of pork and alcohol, provided they keep this among themselves and do not make it accessible to the Muslim population. The jizyah goes into the same public treasury that zakâh funds, import taxes, and land levies go into. Very poor non-Muslims are exempted from paying this tax. Instead, as citizens they are just as eligible as Muslim citizens to receive welfare payments from the public treasury. Also, the salaries of non-Muslim government officials and employees – as well as the maintenance of public services like the non-Muslim religious courts that are exclusively for the benefit of the non-Muslims – are paid out of the same treasury. Conclusions The jizyah and zakâh are two taxation schemes for citizens in the Muslim state. It is only fair that both groups of citizens pay into the state treasury, since both have equal access to state welfare, government services, and public works. The Muslims pay zakâh upon their savings as an act of worship, to purify their wealth. Likewise, military service in the Muslim state is seen as a religious duty when the state summons the person to serve. Non-Muslims are therefore exempt from military service for this reason. Likewise, instead of having to pay the religious tax of zakâh, they have to pay a fixed tax that is purely a civil duty and not tied in with any religious conviction. And Allah knows best. http://islamtoday.com/showme2.cfm?cat_id=2&sub_cat_id=1440