|
| Evolution
is
a
fact,
|
|
 |
|
 |
Evolution is a fact, as far as I'm concerned. However, to atttibure it to mere chance is pretty far fetched, and the same can apply to the equilibrium of the Big Bang. The Earth and entire universe didn't come into existence with a Poof, there you go: Perfect world. It came through a long process which began with an impossibly equilibrated process, which yes, points to an intelligent process taking place, defying the laws of probability where only one big bang can happen. Back to the RNA,1. How can it be possible for these nucleotides to form RNA by coming together in a proper sequence? Evolutionist biologist John Horgan admits the impossibility of the chance formation of RNA as follows;As researchers continue to examine the RNA-world concept closely, more problems emerge. How did RNA arise initially? RNA and its components are difficult to synthesize in a laboratory under the best of conditions, much less under plausible ones.2. Even if we suppose that it formed into sequence by chance, how could this RNA made up of simply a nucleotide chain have decided to self-replicate and with what kind of a mechanism could it have carried out this self-replicating process? Where did it find the nucleotides it used while self-replicating? Even evolutionist microbiologists Gerald Joyce and Leslie Orgel express the desperateness of the situation in their book titled In the RNA World :This discussion has, in a sense, focused on a straw man:the myth of a self-replicating RNA molecule that arose de novo from a soup of random polynucleotides. Not only is such a notion unrealistic in light of our current understanding of prebiotic chemistry, but it should strain the credulity of even an optimist's view of RNA's catalytic potential.3. Even if we suppose that there was a self-replicating RNA in the primordial world, that numerous amino acids of every type ready to be used by RNA were available and that all of these impossibilities somehow took place, the situation still does not lead to the formation of even a single protein. For RNA only includes information concerning the structure of proteins. Amino acids, on the other hand, are raw materials. Nevertheless, no mechanism exists to produce proteins. To consider the existence of RNA sufficient for protein production is as nonsensical as expecting a car to be self-assembled and self-manufactured by simply throwing its design drawn on paper on thousands of its parts piled upon each other. In this case, too, production is out of the question since no factory or workers are involved in the process.Transfer RNA: It binds to amino acids and move them into place on the ribosome as needed. Each type of tRNA binds only a single one of the 20 different amino acids. Amino acids attach to the appropriate tRNA at one end, which has folded into a three-dimensional L-shape. Such a perfect harmony taking place in an area one billionth of a millimeter is clear evidence for intelligent design. I know, intelligent design seems to be the most stupid conclusion one can reach when being dumbfounded. But then again it's the only one that makes sense (until someone can prove otherwise, that is. So yes, keep searching for explanations.)A protein is produced in the ribosome factory with the help of many enzymes and as a result of extremely complex processes within the cell. Ribosome is a complex cell organelle made up of proteins. Therefore, this situation also brings up another unreasonable supposition that ribosome, too, should have come into existence by chance at the same time. Even Nobel prize winner Jacques Monod, who is one of the most fanatical defenders of spontaneous regeneration, explains that protein synthesis can by no means be underestimated so as to depend merely on the information in the nucleic acids: The code is meaningless unless translated. The modern cell's translating machinery consists of at least fifty macromolecular components which are themselves coded in DNA: the code cannot be translated otherwise than by products of translation. It is the modern expression of omne vivum ex ovo (All life [is] from [an] egg). When and how did this circle become closed? It is exceedingly difficult to imagine. How could an RNA chain in the primordial world take such a decision and what methods could it have employed to realize protein production by undertaking the job of fifty specialized particles only on its own? Dr. Leslie Orgel, one of the associates of Stanley Miller and Francis Crick from the University of San Diego California, uses the term scenario for the possibility of the origination of life through the RNA world . Orgel described what kind of features this RNA had to have and how impossible this was in her article titled The Origin of Life published in American Scientist in October 1994:This scenario could have occured, we noted, if prebiotic RNA had two properties not evident today: A capacity to replicate without the help of proteins and an ability to catalyze every step of protein synthesis.As should be clear, to expect these two complex and extremely essential processes from a molecule like RNA is only possible by the power of imagination and viewpoint. Concrete scientific facts, on the other hand, make it explicit that the thesis of the RNA World , which is a new model proposed for the chance formation of life, is an equally implausible fable.What people misconceive about Creation, is that they believe (-as many Creationists believe as well) that it defies reason; that the universe and all living things were created through a poof . Think of it as guided evolution, or reasonable creation.
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(VISITOR) AUTHOR'S NAME
Enrique
MESSAGE TIMESTAMP
16 december 2014, 17:39:08
AUTHOR'S IP LOGGED
201.242.35.133
|
|
|
|
