St. Roymond, not to be too blunt, but it is abundantly clear from your comments that you have little to no grasp on the terms, concepts, history, or sciences at play in this conversation.
I have been where you are, so allow me to offer you some friendly advice. As you are probably aware, in the early 1900’s, the key scientists of the time just knew there had to be some source of mass information inside the cell; telling the cell how to be what it is, how to reproduce itself – how to specify itself among the alternatives. They simply didn’t know what it was or how it worked. Here I’d like to offer you the names of two particular men in science. The first is Erin Schrödinger. Schrödinger is of course the Nobel-winning quantum physicist who wrote the book “What is Life: The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell” in 1944 – a book that Sir Roger Penrose dubbed “among the most influential scientific writings of the 20th century”. In that book Schrödinger proposed the idea of a “code script” as the source of heredity among living things. His use of the words “code-script” is thought to be one of the first times that the source of heredity was widely described as an encoded form of information. Both Francis Crick and James Watson read Schrödinger ‘s book, and they both credit him with the inspiration that would lead them to their famous discoveries in DNA nine years later. The second scientist I would draw your attention to is Sydney Brenner, the Nobel-winning biologist who was very much in the thick of things when Crick and Watson first discovered the code-bearing structure of DNA in 1953. In fact, even before the first paper announcing their enormous discoveries was published, Brenner had already been advised of the developments and had quickly traveled to Cambridge to meet with the two men and discuss their details. Further, Crick and Brenner collaborated together in 1961 to demonstrate that the physical token of memory in DNA (the codon) was indeed just three bases long, and it was Brenner himself who named Crick’s famous “Adapter Hypothesis” of 1955.
Here is my advice to you: When Brenner saw Crick and Watson’s model of DNA at Cambridge he began to understand a significant problem with Schrodinger’s earlier ideas about the transmission of heredity among living things. He would soon become acquainted with the more obscure ideas of another distinguished pioneer in science, and he began to see that Schrodinger’s ideas were indeed wrong while the other man’s predictions would be fully confirmed by physical evidence in 1955. In fact, he came to call this problem “Schrödinger’s Error”.
I am suggesting that you take your time and discover for yourself why Brenner conceived of “Schrödinger Error” – what was correct and what was incorrect.
If you undertake this task, you will likely add several other key names to Schrödinger, Crick, and Brenner; names such as Von Neumann, Turing, Hoagland, Zamecnik, and others, some going back even to the days of Darwin. If you are successful in this journey, you are very likely to forever prevent yourself from making the kinds of uninformed statements you made in your previous post.
I would attempt to inform you of the issues myself, but I am quite certain from your general demeanor that you would fight the history and science all along the way – and I just have no interest in taking on an exercise in futility.