Can DNA be made without the previous existence of DNA? Explain please?

Please note that allamericanreject5648 spelt "note" wrong, written as "not". Sorry, I just don't like it when people get all pedanntic and worked up about other people's spelling, then in their own statement correcting it, spell something wrong.

I would say that it is technically possible to construct a strand of DNA without first having a parent strand, as nucleotides could probably be joined (using polymerases) into a random sequence. However, unless you were incredibly lucky, this strand would do jack and code for nothing.

Regarding RNA, this is coded from a DNA strand so you do kind of need a pre-existing strand of DNA at once point in time.

And genetic engineering usually splices together pre-existing DNA, or deletes parts so again, technically there was already a DNA molecule there.

Any geneticists out there who want to point out any mistake I made during this spiel, go ahead.

Anyone wanting to point out my spelling mistakes, please don't.

And yes, I know pedantic is spelt wrong in my second sentence, it was a test.

The teleological argument proposes that existence of underlining concepts that permit for the existence of materialistic shape shows the existence of a planned reason for the existence of fabric existence that it ought to serve some underlining objective or end. nonetheless it ought to be that this argument does have some advantage there is as of yet no sound and valid argument connecting it to anybody faith or anthropomorphous deity of those religions. The cosmological argument is a controversy for an uncaused reason that initiated all causal forces. It would not immediately assert that the uncaused reason ought to be a precise deity. And it assumes that the theory of causality necessitates an uncaused reason. It became into formulated extra as a thank you to dodge countless regress while discussing the existence of many times happening certainty. Neither argument is presented as info of gods existence, yet quite as info by way of fact of this the thought of god is a philosophical threat. Philosophically the arguments themselves can no longer in any clever way (different than for circumstantial coincedence) be seen as helping any religious claims regarding the character or reason of the in all probability existent god. The arguments in easy terms serve for occasion that the as an theory God would exist interior the context of specific definitions. The definition even nonetheless would be in severe conflict with many substantial religious connotations of the notice god, by way of fact the arguments themselves characteristic no anthropomorphic sympathy or characteristics to the term god as an theory.

reverse transcriptase is a protien capable of taking an RNA strand and using it to make a DNA strand containing the same data, with a complementary strand. so this is one way to get DNA.

yeah it just a molecule.

thow, DNA is millions of bits long. its taken billions of year to perfect thows molecules into the right blue prints for what they are.just to gut a simple bacterium world be impossible hard to make from scratch. that's why you bio-engernie what you have its fare easier.

stop asking people to do your homework.

please not that todd spelt "those" incorrectly. I dont even know if "thows" is a word.