Science Disproves Evolution

Since: Dec 08

Tarpon Springs, FL

#909 Aug 20, 2014
DNA and Proteins

DNA cannot function without hundreds of preexisting proteins (a), but proteins are produced only at the direction of DNA (b). Because each needs the other, a satisfactory explanation for the origin of one must also explain the origin of the other (c). Therefore, the components of these manufacturing systems must have come into existence simultaneously. This implies creation.

Some of these necessary protein systems decode the DNA, store the DNA (histones spools), transcribe it into messenger RNA, and assemble proteins (ribosomes). These systems, present in each cell, are extremely complex.

One of the most studied proteins in mammals, including humans, is called p53. It binds to thousands of DNA sites and influences cell growth, death, and structure. It is involved in fertility and early embryonic development. It also stifles cancers by repairing DNA, suppressing tumors, and killing genetically damaged cells (d). How could DNA have survived unless p53 and its many functions already existed?

In each human, tens of thousands of genes are damaged daily (e)! Also, when a cell divides, its DNA at times is copied with errors. Every organism has machinery that identifies and repairs damaged and mistranslated DNA (f). Without such repair systems, the organism would quickly deteriorate and die. If evolution happened, each organism would have become extinct before these DNA repair mechanisms could evolve.

Life’s complexity is mind boggling—not something that random process could ever produce.

[continue]

Since: Dec 08

Tarpon Springs, FL

#910 Aug 20, 2014
DNA and Proteins
[continued]

a. Ribosomes, complex structures that assemble proteins, have or require about 200 different proteins. The number depends somewhat on whether the organism is a bacterium, eukaryote, or archaea.

b. Richard E. Dickerson,“Chemical Evolution and the Origin of Life,” Scientific American, Vol. 239, September 1978, p. 73.

“The amino acids must link together to form proteins, and the other chemicals must join up to make nucleic acids, including the vital DNA. The seemingly insurmountable obstacle is the way the two reactions are inseparably linked—one can’t happen without the other. Proteins depend on DNA for their formation. But DNA cannot form without pre-existing protein.” Hitching, p. 66.

c.“The origin of the genetic code presents formidable unsolved problems. The coded information in the nucleotide sequence is meaningless without the translation machinery, but the specification for this machinery is itself coded in the DNA. Thus without the machinery the information is meaningless, but without the coded information the machinery cannot be produced! This presents a paradox of the ‘chicken and egg’ variety, and attempts to solve it have so far been sterile.” John C. Walton,(Lecturer in Chemistry, University of St. Andrews, Fife, Scotland),“Organization and the Origin of Life,” Origins, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1977, pp. 30–31.

“Genes and enzymes are linked together in a living cell—two interlocked systems, each supporting the other. It is difficult to see how either could manage alone. Yet if we are to avoid invoking either a Creator or a very large improbability, we must accept that one occurred before the other in the origin of life. But which one was it? We are left with the ancient riddle: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” Shapiro, p. 135.

“Because DNA and proteins depend so intimately on each other for their survival, it’s hard to imagine one of them having evolved first. But it’s just as implausible for them to have emerged simultaneously out of a prebiotic soup.” Carl Zimmer,“How and Where Did Life on Earth Arise?” Science, Vol. 309, 1 July 2005, p. 89.

d. Mitch Leslie,“Brothers in Arms Against Cancer,” Science, Vol. 331, 25 March 2011, pp. 1551–1552.

Erika Check Hayden,“Life Is Complicated,” Nature, Vol. 464, 1 April 2010, pp. 664–667.

e.“... the human body receives tens of thousands of DNA lesions per day.” Stephen P. Jackson and Jiri Bartek,“The DNA-Damage Response in Human Biology and Disease,” Nature, Vol. 461, 22 October 2009, p. 1071.

f. Tomas Lindahl and Richard D. Wood,“Quality Control by DNA Repair,” Science, Vol. 286, 3 December 1999, pp. 1897-1905.

[http://www.creationscience.co m/onlinebook/LifeSciences39.ht ml]

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#911 Aug 20, 2014
Pahu wrote:
…copy and paste removed because Pahu does not see to have the intelligence to offer his own take on the subject…
Why do creationists need to obfuscate and misinterpret and misrepresent and lie to make their claims?

And why to creationist sheep need follow by hanging onto every word of those lies and promote those lies as though they were intelligent and actually understood what they were promoting?

Experiments in the 1960s showed that messenger RNA has the ability to store genetic information, while transfer and ribosomal RNA have the ability to translate genetic information into proteins. Experiments performed two decades later showed that some RNAs can even act as an enzyme to self-edit their own genetic code! These results raised two questions: 1) Why does RNA play so many roles in the flow of genetic information? 2) Why bother storing genetic information in DNA, if RNA alone could do the job?
RNA has great capability as a genetic molecule; it once had to carry on hereditary processes on its own. It now seems certain that RNA was the first molecule of heredity, so it evolved all the essential methods for storing and expressing genetic information before DNA came onto the scene. However, single-stranded RNA is rather unstable and is easily damaged by enzymes. By essentially doubling the existing RNA molecule, and using deoxyribose sugar instead of ribose, DNA evolved as a much more stable form to pass genetic information with accuracy.
http://www.dnaftb.org/26/
Thinking

Poole, UK

#912 Aug 20, 2014
Bollocks.
Pahu wrote:
DNA and Proteins
[continued]
a. Ribosomes, complex structures that assemble proteins, have or require about 200 different proteins. The number depends somewhat on whether the organism is a bacterium, eukaryote, or archaea.
b. Richard E. Dickerson,“Chemical Evolution and the Origin of Life,” Scientific American, Vol. 239, September 1978, p. 73.
“The amino acids must link together to form proteins, and the other chemicals must join up to make nucleic acids, including the vital DNA. The seemingly insurmountable obstacle is the way the two reactions are inseparably linked—one can’t happen without the other. Proteins depend on DNA for their formation. But DNA cannot form without pre-existing protein.” Hitching, p. 66.
c.“The origin of the genetic code presents formidable unsolved problems. The coded information in the nucleotide sequence is meaningless without the translation machinery, but the specification for this machinery is itself coded in the DNA. Thus without the machinery the information is meaningless, but without the coded information the machinery cannot be produced! This presents a paradox of the ‘chicken and egg’ variety, and attempts to solve it have so far been sterile.” John C. Walton,(Lecturer in Chemistry, University of St. Andrews, Fife, Scotland),“Organization and the Origin of Life,” Origins, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1977, pp. 30–31.
“Genes and enzymes are linked together in a living cell—two interlocked systems, each supporting the other. It is difficult to see how either could manage alone. Yet if we are to avoid invoking either a Creator or a very large improbability, we must accept that one occurred before the other in the origin of life. But which one was it? We are left with the ancient riddle: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?” Shapiro, p. 135.
“Because DNA and proteins depend so intimately on each other for their survival, it’s hard to imagine one of them having evolved first. But it’s just as implausible for them to have emerged simultaneously out of a prebiotic soup.” Carl Zimmer,“How and Where Did Life on Earth Arise?” Science, Vol. 309, 1 July 2005, p. 89.
d. Mitch Leslie,“Brothers in Arms Against Cancer,” Science, Vol. 331, 25 March 2011, pp. 1551–1552.
Erika Check Hayden,“Life Is Complicated,” Nature, Vol. 464, 1 April 2010, pp. 664–667.
e.“... the human body receives tens of thousands of DNA lesions per day.” Stephen P. Jackson and Jiri Bartek,“The DNA-Damage Response in Human Biology and Disease,” Nature, Vol. 461, 22 October 2009, p. 1071.
f. Tomas Lindahl and Richard D. Wood,“Quality Control by DNA Repair,” Science, Vol. 286, 3 December 1999, pp. 1897-1905.
[http://www.creationscience.co m/onlinebook/LifeSciences39.ht ml]

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#913 Aug 21, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Bollocks.
<quoted text>
Yup that’s what he rests on his chin while sucking off his pet creation scientist

I know, I know... creation scientist = oxymoron of the most obtuse kind but that’s what they call themselves to project delusions of grandeur and make their lying BS seem more credible to the poor gullible sops like Pahu.
Thinking

York, UK

#914 Aug 21, 2014
churches that finance lying about science should lose charity status.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yup that’s what he rests on his chin while sucking off his pet creation scientist
I know, I know... creation scientist = oxymoron of the most obtuse kind but that’s what they call themselves to project delusions of grandeur and make their lying BS seem more credible to the poor gullible sops like Pahu.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#915 Aug 21, 2014
Thinking wrote:
churches that finance lying about science should lose charity status.
<quoted text>
Churches are a business, they should all lose charity status
religionisillnes s

London, UK

#916 Aug 24, 2014
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Churches are a business, they should all lose charity status
Cults like religion, which are based on lies should be investigated - they cause more harm than good.
Thinking

Poole, UK

#917 Aug 26, 2014
Put a warning sign on the church door, "May contain nuts".
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Churches are a business, they should all lose charity status

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#918 Aug 26, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Put a warning sign on the church door, "May contain nuts".
<quoted text>
LOL.

Did I tell you about a church near here?

They had a sign outside “God saves fallen women”

Someone had written underneath in bold black marker –“ask him to save one for me”
Thinking

Poole, UK

#919 Aug 26, 2014
That's cute.

jesus saves (but buddha scores off the deflection.)
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL.
Did I tell you about a church near here?
They had a sign outside “God saves fallen women”
Someone had written underneath in bold black marker –“ask him to save one for me”
Patrick

United States

#920 Aug 26, 2014
Thinking wrote:
That's cute.
jesus saves (but buddha scores off the deflection.)
<quoted text>
Jesus saves, some believe ...
I" installed a skylight in my apartment... the people who live above me are furious!"
Steven Wright

Since: Dec 08

Tarpon Springs, FL

#921 Aug 27, 2014
Handedness: Left and Right 1

Genetic material, DNA and RNA, is composed of nucleotides. In living things, nucleotides are always “right-handed.”(They are called right-handed, because a beam of polarized light passing through them rotates like a right-handed screw.) Nucleotides rarely form outside life, but when they do, half are left-handed, and half are right-handed. If the first nucleotides formed by natural processes, they would have “mixed-handedness” and therefore could not evolve life’s genetic material. In fact,“mixed” genetic material cannot even copy itself (a).

Each type of amino acid, when found in nonliving material or when synthesized in the laboratory, comes in two chemically equivalent forms. Half are right-handed, and half are left-handed—mirror images of each other. However, amino acids in life, including plants, animals, bacteria, molds, and even viruses, are essentially all left-handed (b)—except in some diseased or aging tissue (c).

(a).“Equally disappointing, we can induce copying of the original template only when we run our experiments with nucleotides having a right-handed configuration. All nucleotides synthesized biologically today are righthanded. Yet on the primitive earth, equal numbers of right- and left-handed nucleotides would have been present. When we put equal numbers of both kinds of nucleotides in our reaction mixtures, copying was inhibited.” Leslie E. Orgel,“The Origin of Life on the Earth,” Scientific American, Vol. 271, October 1994, p. 82.

“There is no explanation why cells use L [left-handed] amino acids to synthesize their proteins but D [right-handed] ribose or D-deoxyribose to synthesize their nucleotides or nucleic acids. In particular, the incorporation of even a single L-ribose or L-deoxyribose residue into a nucleic acid, if it should ever occur in the course of cellular syntheses, could seriously interfere with vital structure-function relationships. The well-known double helical DNA structure does not allow the presence of L-deoxyribose; the replication and transcription mechanisms generally require that any wrong sugar such as L-deoxyribose has to be eliminated, that is, the optical purity of the D-sugars units has to be 100%.” Dose, p. 352.

(b). An important exception occurs in a component in cell membranes of eubacteria. There the amino acids are right-handed. This has led many to conclude that they must have evolved separately from all other bacteria. Because evolving the first living cell is so improbable, having it happen twice, in effect, compounds the improbability.[See Adrian Barnett,“The Second Coming: Did Life Evolve on Earth More Than Once?” New Scientist, Vol. 157, No. 2121, 14 February 1998, p. 19.]

(c). Recent discoveries have found that some amino acids, most notably aspartic acid, flip (at certain locations in certain proteins) from the normal left-handed form to the right-handed form. Flipping increases with age and correlates with disease, such as Alzheimer’s disease, cataracts, and arteriosclerosis. As one ages, flipping even accumulates in facial skin, but not other skin.[See Noriko Fujii,“D-Amino Acid in Elderly Tissues,” Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, Vol. 28, September 2005, pp. 1585–1589.]

If life evolved, why did this destructive tendency to flip not destroy cells long before complete organisms evolved?

[http://www.creationscience.co m/onlinebook/LifeSciences40.ht ml]

“There is no god!”

Since: Jun 12

Södertälje, Sweden

#922 Aug 27, 2014
creationism isn't science
Patrick

United States

#923 Aug 27, 2014
Mikko wrote:
creationism isn't science
Its' both a floor wax and a dessert topping!
Dak-Original

London, UK

#924 Aug 27, 2014
Pahu wrote:
Acquired Characteristics
Acquired characteristics—characteristic s gained after birth—cannot be inherited (a). For example, large muscles acquired by a man in a weight-lifting program cannot be inherited by his child. Nor did giraffes get long necks because their ancestors stretched to reach high leaves. While almost all evolutionists agree that acquired characteristics cannot be inherited, many unconsciously slip into this false belief. On occasion, Darwin did (b).
However, stressful environments for some animals and plants cause their offspring to express various defenses. New genetic traits are not created; instead, the environment can switch on genetic machinery already present. The marvel is that optimal (c) genetic machinery already exists to handle some contingencies, not that time, the environment, or “a need” can produce the machinery (d).
Also, rates of variation within a species (microevolution, not macroevolution) increase enormously when organisms are under stress, such as starvation (e). Stressful situations would have been widespread in the centuries after a global flood.
a. The false belief that acquired characteristics can be inherited, called Lamarckism, would mean that the environment can directly and beneficially change egg and sperm cells. Only a few biologists try to justify Lamarckism. The minor acquired characteristics they cite have no real significance for any present theory of organic evolution. For example, see “Lamarck, Dr. Steel and Plagiarism,” Nature, Vol. 337, 12 January 1989, pp. 101–102.
b.“This hypothesis [which Darwin called pangenesis] maintained the idea of inheritance of acquired characteristics.” A. M. Winchester, Genetics, 5th edition (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1977), p. 24.
c. In writing about this amazing capability, Queitsch admits:
“... it is a perplexing evolutionary question how a population might move to a different local optimum without an intervening period of reduced fitness (adaptive valley).” Christine Queitsch et al.,“Hsp90 as a Capacitor of Phenotypic Variation,” Nature, Vol. 417, 6 June 2002, p. 623.
d.“... genes that were switched on in the parent to generate the defensive response are also switched on in the offspring.” Erkki Haukioja,“Bite the Mother, Fight the Daughter,” Nature, Vol. 401, 2 September 1999, p. 23.
“... non-lethal exposure of an animal to carnivores, and a plant to a herbivore, not only induces a defence, but causes the attacked organisms to produce offspring that are better defended than offspring from unthreatened parents.” Anurag A. Agrawal et al.,“Transgenerational Induction of Defences in Animals and Plants,” Nature, Vol. 401, 2 September 1999, p. 60.
“... hidden genetic diversity exists within species and can erupt when [environmental] conditions change.” John Travis,“Evolutionary Shocker?: Stressful Conditions May Trigger Plants and Animals to Unleash New Forms Quickly,” Science News, Vol. 161, 22 June 2002, p. 394.
“Environmental stress can reveal genetic variants, presumably because it compromises buffering systems. If selected for, these uncovered phenotypes can lead to heritable changes in plants and animals (assimilation).” Queitsch et al., p. 618.
e. Marina Chicurel,“Can Organisms Speed Their Own Evolution?” Science, Vol. 292, 8 June 2001, pp. 1824–1827.
[From "In the Beginning" by Walt Brown]
Can I then assume that you are very much into Christianity belief?
Dak-Original

London, UK

#925 Aug 27, 2014
Mikko wrote:
creationism isn't science
They dress up Mumbo jumbo labourieosly with some strands of science in order to "back up" mere belief matter.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#926 Aug 27, 2014
Pahu wrote:
Handedness: Left and Right 1
Genetic material, DNA and RNA, is composed of nucleotides. In living things, nucleotides are always “right-handed.”(They are called right-handed, because a beam of polarized light passing through them rotates like a right-handed screw.) Nucleotides rarely form outside life, but when they do, half are left-handed, and half are right-handed. If the first nucleotides formed by natural processes, they would have “mixed-handedness” and therefore could not evolve life’s genetic material. In fact,“mixed” genetic material cannot even copy itself (a).
Each type of amino acid, when found in nonliving material or when synthesized in the laboratory, comes in two chemically equivalent forms. Half are right-handed, and half are left-handed—mirror images of each other. However, amino acids in life, including plants, animals, bacteria, molds, and even viruses, are essentially all left-handed (b)—except in some diseased or aging tissue (c).
(a).“Equally disappointing, we can induce copying of the original template only when we run our experiments with nucleotides having a right-handed configuration. All nucleotides synthesized biologically today are righthanded. Yet on the primitive earth, equal numbers of right- and left-handed nucleotides would have been present. When we put equal numbers of both kinds of nucleotides in our reaction mixtures, copying was inhibited.” Leslie E. Orgel,“The Origin of Life on the Earth,” Scientific American, Vol. 271, October 1994, p. 82.
“There is no explanation why cells use L [left-handed] amino acids to synthesize their proteins but D [right-handed] ribose or D-deoxyribose to synthesize their nucleotides or nucleic acids. In particular, the incorporation of even a single L-ribose or L-deoxyribose residue into a nucleic acid, if it should ever occur in the course of cellular syntheses, could seriously interfere with vital structure-function relationships. The well-known double helical DNA structure does not allow the presence of L-deoxyribose; the replication and transcription mechanisms generally require that any wrong sugar such as L-deoxyribose has to be eliminated, that is, the optical purity of the D-sugars units has to be 100%.” Dose, p. 352.
(b). An important exception occurs in a component in cell membranes of eubacteria. There the amino acids are right-handed. This has led many to conclude that they must have evolved separately from all other bacteria. Because evolving the first living cell is so improbable, having it happen twice, in effect, compounds the improbability.[See Adrian Barnett,“The Second Coming: Did Life Evolve on Earth More Than Once?” New Scientist, Vol. 157, No. 2121, 14 February 1998, p. 19.]
(c). Recent discoveries have found that some amino acids, most notably aspartic acid, flip (at certain locations in certain proteins) from the normal left-handed form to the right-handed form. Flipping increases with age and correlates with disease, such as Alzheimer’s disease, cataracts, and arteriosclerosis. As one ages, flipping even accumulates in facial skin, but not other skin.[See Noriko Fujii,“D-Amino Acid in Elderly Tissues,” Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin, Vol. 28, September 2005, pp. 1585–1589.]
If life evolved, why did this destructive tendency to flip not destroy cells long before complete organisms evolved?
[http://www.creationscience.co m/onlinebook/LifeSciences40.ht ml]
The right half of the brain controls the left half of the body. This means that only left handed people are in their right mind.
Thinking

Exmouth, UK

#927 Aug 28, 2014
I'm left handed but I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
The right half of the brain controls the left half of the body. This means that only left handed people are in their right mind.

“I started out with nothing”

Since: Nov 10

and still got most of it left

#928 Aug 29, 2014
Thinking wrote:
I'm left handed but I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
<quoted text>
Chuckle...

I’m ambidextrous, I’d give either arm to be normal

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 1 min New Age Spiritual... 244,731
Atheists should stop feeding the stereotypes 1 min Shizle 11
Is the Christian god good? 1 min Shizle 4
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 min Paul Porter1 20,514
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 6 min Shizle 10,673
Atheist believe, they are just hiding!!! 18 hr Richardfs 18
There is no meaning without God 21 hr Shizle 3
More from around the web