FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineLinkedinPinterest




If the ID concept had existed in the 1940s, the hypothesis would state, "abiogenesis was the result of design on the part of an intelligent entity." A test or prediction of the hypothesis would be "At the heart of biological systems, there will be found a semiotic code that reflects symbolic meaning and that can be translated into the phenotype of all cells". If such a hypothesis and prediction had been made, then the subsequent findings of molecular biology would have strongly confirmed the hypothesis.

-- Dr Sy Garte


I am familiar with some of the writings on biosemiosis from authors in the field, and I've carefully read the information on this site. To say that I'm impressed would be an understatement. You've articulated these issues in a truly unique and convincing way. I congratulate you! – Donald Kennedy



This is great insight. It is not reasonable to approach genetic translation under any other paradigm than the genuine representationalism that it is.

- Dr Gwendolyn Escobar



A complete set of formal relationships are fundamental to the origin of life. Chance?! -- Tom



I would have never believed it, until I read it. I have to agree, this is one of the most accessible ID arguments I have ever read. It even has a succinct *operational definition* of intelligence. Prepare yourself to be black-balled by the critics. I bet they don’t even respond. Who needs them? -- Brenner PhD (Georgetown) 



I spent an hour and a half here, and had to look up a dozen phrases. It was worth every minute. I actually learned something important. -- Daryl



My question is very simple: Why have we not been talking about this for the past 20 years? -- Anonymous



Interesting, and plausible. however, I'm wondering what implications could be drawn even from a full embrace of your analysis. Saying "intelligence" is behind biosemiotics says nothing whatever about the nature of that intelligence, what it might consist of, where/when it might be located, whether there is any continuing role for it beyond an initial one, or what if any its attitude toward the eventual products of its exercise might be. In short, I'm not sure how you have significantly advanced the dialogue regarding the relationship of human beings to the rest of the Universe. -- JD Eveland



I really like the music box example. It's a nice illustration of the mechanics involved. Along with the "dimensional" aspects (and the code) this is clearly the most compelling argument I've read to date. I can no longer entertain the RNA concept. It just doesn't fit the data. -- Oliver Corally 

Thank you very much for the information contained within your blog. I've added it to a post I wrote on epigenetic mechanisms. The purpose of my three blogs is to illustrate to the common public just how complex microbiological things can be easily illustrated. I believe your website here offers enough illustrations for that while satisfying those more desirous of the usual intellect speak. Thanks again. - Kevin Franck



Excellent work! Congratulations! – S Davidson



There have been many solid arguments for a teleological force or direction in the make-up of living things. Many of those arguments have been well researched and well presented, yet something has been missing. Biosemiosis is the final nail in the coffin. Deny it now only at the expense of being truly against the evidence.  -- Franklin Kyle, Manhattan NY



All those assumptions that never added up, all those weak defenses of a paradigm lost. They are all dead in the water. Life required representations from the very start. - Pat Miller PhD, Auckland



How can science identify an act of intelligence? That is exactly what semiosis has provided.  A link to this webpage was sent by a friend at the school of semiotics, along with a note of enthusiasm. I now understand why. This will expose those who talk about science and logic, but won’t walk the walk when the results are this clear. The workings of the epistemic cut are for all to see. For the reductionist, they’ve been hiding in plain sight.  -- Mika Gurina  Tartu, Estonia



Biosemiosis doesn’t “deny evolution" which is what we always hear about on TV. In fact it’s just the opposite. This is what makes life and change possible to begin with, and it has every marking of being designed by an INTELLIGENCE.

No Kidding! Go figure that!  -- Anonymous



Historically, the scientific literature was full of references to the genetic code being symbolic. Then modern materialist dogma set in, and now only with the emergence of the biosemiotic movement has the true nature of the code being talked about again. This information is more important than most people can realize. But why should they have to? Most people want to be able to trust science, but they often can't (at least not in America). We should all right the record. -- Marvin, Paris-Sorbonne University



I have been a technology provider to disease research groups for more than 30 years. I consider myself to be fairly up to date. The work I am involved in does not include origins issues, so I am not completely surprised that I am not more aware of this information. That being said, I have not read a more coherent “framework” of protein synthesis than what is presented here. – Anonymous



Hey Congratulations on the website. I’ve been waiting for a long time to read it. Here is my comment: THIS WEBSITE should be required reading for every news reporter in the United States!!  - Herman Bradley



I have a suggestion. I read the article "Writing Biosemiosis" on ComplexityCafe.com. That article, or at least the information in it, should be added to this website. Really important I think. Other than that, this is a real eye-opener. Great Job! -- Glen Tennike

You have my compliments on a well done site. Biosemioisis provides a valid test of design in biology. You will not make critics happy with that.    – Antonni Hanninen MSV



The music box on the “Easy Understanding” page is perfect. It makes it really understandable, and made reading the rest of the material that much more interesting. I also appreciated the tone on the page about “why this is important”. I am not a particularly religious person, but I don’t think that people have to argue with those indoctrinated to think matter is all there is. Nor do they have to stand by and allow their customs to be overrun. Just getting information like this out there is a genuine improvement for both sides. Best of luck. -- Gabriel P  



I had never heard of semiosis until I read this page. I am glad I did. Now I want to share it. Really Informative! After you think about it, it really makes perfect sense. I guess we just take things for granted. -- Kelly Unger 



Dear Biosemiosis. I have a compliment to give you. This is it: I want to know more -- Anonymous



When I was reading this, I was thinking… “What’s the big deal?” Then it reminded me that transfer RNA are associated and bound with their amino acids in a separate process than the actual translation. That got me thinking, so I went to my references and verified it. THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING. I had never thought of this before. It’s about ORGANIZATION – not just chemistry!

Not once in my biology courses was this ever pointed out. We were taught the role that aminoacyl-tRNA played in the ribosome, without discussing the implications.

But now I know. I also now know how this relates directly to semiosis. Game Over. - Jackson2112



I actually really enjoyed this read. I also visited complexitycafe and read the articles on there. I am a member of the debate society on my campus. I am going to bring this up in group. It should be very interesting subject matter. Congratulations. -- @WLPeters



I disagree with so many things in these issues. But I keep my sanity by just admitting when I am stumped. This information has me stumped and I admit it. I can find no error in any of it, and I am a working geneticist for the past 18 years.  -- Thomas D Waters