Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Questions college students should ask science professors

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Students who ask science professors certain questions will be the ones who’ll appreciate the weaknesses in various anti-ID or anti-creation theories. Preferably they’ll ask after they’ve gotten an “A” in the class, maybe even after they’ve gotten their diploma. The ideal IDist or creationist student can hopefully score in the 99th percentile on evolutionary tests, but still understand the difficulties with anti-ID theories like Darwinian evolution.

Jonathan Wells had his list of questions that high school students should ask their biology teachers, and there have been some good responses, thus I didn’t think Wells’ list provided pointed enough questions.

So I’m developing a list for college students interested in ID or creation science. Here are some questions off the top of my head which were occasionally inspired even by anti-IDists or anti-creationists:

1. How can functional proteins form without ribosomes or ribosome-like machines?

2. How can natural selection or neutral evolution evolve poly constrained DNA or any poly constrained systems in general?

3. How did the first organism regulate protein expression and cellular development without regulatory elements or developmental mechanisms?

4. How did any vital organ or protein form given the absence of the organ would be fatal? Absence of insulin is fatal in organisms requiring insulin. How did insulin become a vital part of living organisms? If you say it wasn’t essential when it first evolved, then how can you say selection had any role in evolving insulin without just guessing?

5. How did DNA evolve in a proteins-first or RNA first scenario?

6. How did amino acid homochirality evolve since the amino acids in biotic soup experiments are racemic, plus homochiral amino acids spontaneously racemize outside of living systems? How about DNAs and sugars? If the expectation value is 50% left, how do 100% left or right forms emerge in pre-biotic soups, and more importantly how is homochirality maintained long enough for chemical evolution to work?

7. Don’t dead dogs stay dead dogs and doesn’t Humpty Dumpty stay broken?

8. Describe how a partially functioning ribosomes or any partial implementation of the DNA code could operate in a working cell, and how a such cell can operate without such vital parts.

9. Are most laboratory and field observations of evolution reductive rather than constructive of new coordinated functions? For the sake of argument, let extinction can count as reductive evolution. When bacteria evolve antibiotic resistance, what proportion of cases involved evolution of a new complex protein?

10. Cite an experiment or field observation where a substantially new protein was evolved in real time or is expected to evolve in real time over the next few generations. Nylonase is the most cited example, but that wasn’t a substantially new protein. But even granting that, how many complex proteins are evolving in the biosphere versus those getting lost forever.

11. What new trait in human populations do you expect to become genetically fixed in all 7 Billion or so people, and how fast do you expect that trait to overtake the population in how many generation? If you can’t identify convincingly one or a few traits, how then can you argue for evolution of so many traits in the past?

12. If a species has a population of 10,000, how can selection act in a particulate manner on 4 giga bases of DNA individually? Wouldn’t such a large genome relative to small population size result in lots of selection interference, hence wouldn’t most molecular evolution be neutral of necessity as Kimura asserted?

13. Do geological layers involving permineralized fossils or other kinds of well-preserved fossils require rapid burial? If the burial process is rapid, does it really take millions of years then to make that particular layer that has fossils? If you find C14 in Cambrian fossils not the result of contamination or lab error, does that mean the fossil had a more recent time of death than 500,000,000 years? Given the half lives of DNA and amino acids or other decay processes of biological organisms, how can we account for preservation of these biotic materials for far longer than indicated by their chemical half-lives?

14. Can geological strata form rapidly? What about the university experiments and field observations that show strata can form rapidly? If they can form rapidly, and if fossil presence demands they form rapidly, doesn’t that suggest they formed rapidly?

15. If redshifts in the Big Bang model are discovered to be possibly caused by other mechanisms than relative motion, wouldn’t that put the Big Bang in doubt? Wouldn’t that also raise questions about stellar distances?

16. What is the farthest astronomical distance that can be determined by parallax or very long base line interferometry, and what fraction is that detection distance relative to the claimed size of the visible universe relative to the Big Bang? How do you account for Super Nova by stars not inside galaxies? If so, doesn’t that mean there is a higher probability of Super Nova in a star outside a galaxy by a factor of hundreds of billions if not more? If so, why should this be?

Feel free to list your ideas or improve the list above.

Remember, the goal is the question will be so powerful, that when the student asks the scientist or other authority figure, and when the scientist is forced to admit the truth, the student will realize the weakness in mainstream claims. I didn’t list vague or ambiguous soft ball questions. The strength of the biology questions is in complex design details, not some 19th century Darwinian view of the simplicity of life. I added a few YEC-friendly questions just for fun. A good scientist ought to welcome and value skepticism and hard questions.

I once gambled a little bit on a weaker question that a creationist biology student should ask her anatomy and physiology professor regarding the evolution of hearts. I basically suggested she ask about how the intermediate plumbing can work if it is not all wired-correctly in the first place. Here for example are the some various reptilian hearts:

how does it evolve from a fish heart?

When that biology junior posed that question, she came back the next week at our ID/Creation meeting beaming. She said, “you’re right, there are no transitionals!” I realized then whatever I said might not be as powerful as what professors are unable to say when asked the right questions!

Feel free to add your questions in the comment section or CEU Questions students should ask professors. I’ll be collecting them at a website for future reference which I can direct students to. Thanks in advance.

Photo credits: Encyclopedia Britannica, Quia.com.

Comments
Sal said there were some good answers to Wells' questions and links to someone who posted evidence-free responses. Where are the good responses to Wells' questions? Wells' question on the OoL is relevant because how life started directly impacts how it evolved. OoL= design then it is evolution by design. It is only if blind processes produced life would we infer evolution = the blind watchmaker. Sal's link didn't understand that- well most, if not all, evos are too stupid to grasp that.Joe
April 8, 2014
April
04
Apr
8
08
2014
04:39 AM
4
04
39
AM
PDT
Roy:
1. Slowly. The ribosomes merely augment the protein formation process, they aren’t strictly necessary for it. Proteins could be formed by tRNA molecules binding to codons as they are now, it’d just be less reliable.
Too slow for any organism- if functional proteins could actually form that way.Joe
April 8, 2014
April
04
Apr
8
08
2014
04:33 AM
4
04
33
AM
PDT
Where did all the water on earth come from? I posted a more in depth version of this question here: https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/enceladus-et-life-researchers-talk-to-ool-researchers/ Never mind. It's short so I'll copy it. Tjguy Apr 08 - 3:40 am How would the Standard Model explain where this water deep underground came from? The problem is exacerbated when it comes to earth! If the Big Bang is the proper explanation for the origin of our solar system, where did all the water come from? http://www.icr.org/article/8036/ http://crev.info/2014/04/water-theories-dry-up/ These two articles speak of recent evidence for a deep deep ocean larger than the surface ocean! How in the world can cosmology explain this?! Can this water on Enceladus and in the depths of the earth(&/or the oceans too) be explained without resorting to a ‘God of the gaps’ argument?tjguy
April 8, 2014
April
04
Apr
8
08
2014
02:57 AM
2
02
57
AM
PDT
3. How did the first organism regulate protein expression and cellular development without regulatory elements or developmental mechanisms?
Seriously? Wells thinks the first organisms were multicellular? It’s hard to take this list seriously.
That list was mine, not Wells. Thanks any way for responding as you're helping me review and edit my questions. Bacteria need gene regulation. The phrase "development" does usually pertain to multicellular organisms, however, there are unicellular organisms that are studied as examples of development: http://www.devbio.biology.gatech.edu/?page_id=30 That said, what is the proper word for the control and construction of a cell's architecture if not the word "development"? How about specification or construction?scordova
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
09:37 PM
9
09
37
PM
PDT
edit #9 for clarity: Protein synthesis is the process of translating recorded information into specific physical effects during the production of proteins within the cell.Upright BiPed
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
09:23 PM
9
09
23
PM
PDT
Art wrote:
Cite an experiment or field observation where a substantially new protein was evolved in real time or is expected to evolve in real time over the next few generations. Been there, done that.
Dr. Hunter's response to Art's claim De Novo Genes Art, if you want to post at the CreationEvolutionUniversity forum, there is no moderation queue there. You can speak freely there for the most part just as you did at ISCID. Just let me know if you want an account.scordova
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
09:21 PM
9
09
21
PM
PDT
Apologies to Art Hunt. I didn't look at the comment queue early enough. For the reader's benefit, Art is a science professor, so you can see for yourself the answers! Thanks for weighing in Art.scordova
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
09:09 PM
9
09
09
PM
PDT
I asked:
2. How can natural selection or neutral evolution evolve poly constrained DNA or any poly constrained systems in general?
Roy's response:
2. The same way they do when singly constrained. Since almost all evolution involves trades and balances, just about everything is polyconstrained anyway.
A. we don't know evolution can even evolve a singly constrained system like DNA coding for functional proteins, much less poly constrained -- so that is just argument from assertion B. neutral evolution will scramble polyconstrained DNA and natural selection can't find it because local fitness peaks will prevent it from finding polyconstrained solutions, the Cornell papers explored the problems.scordova
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
09:06 PM
9
09
06
PM
PDT
Where are the HARD questions?
Protein synthesis is the process of translating recorded information into specific physical effects. How can you translate a medium of information (like DNA/RNA) into a physical effect without an irreducibly complex system of representations and protocols? Both are required in order to bridge the necessary physical discontinuity between the arrangement of the representations and their physical effects, while simultaneously preserving the necessary discontinuity. It's the primeval irreducibly complex system on earth, and is not the product of Darwinian evolution. It cannot be altered from these necessary material conditions without the loss of function. The loss of function in this instance is the real-world capacity to organize the cell. Definitions: representation: an arrangement of matter that evokes an effect within a system, where the arrangement is physicochemically arbitrary to the effect it evokes. protocol: an arrangement of matter that physically establishes the otherwise non-existent relationship between the arrangement of a representation and its effect. Your turn.Upright BiPed
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
08:47 PM
8
08
47
PM
PDT
Cite an experiment or field observation where a substantially new protein was evolved in real time or is expected to evolve in real time over the next few generations. Been there, done that.Arthur Hunt
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
08:42 PM
8
08
42
PM
PDT
3. How did the first organism regulate protein expression and cellular development without regulatory elements or developmental mechanisms? Seriously? Wells thinks the first organisms were multicellular? It's hard to take this list seriously.Arthur Hunt
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
08:34 PM
8
08
34
PM
PDT
I asked:
3. How did the first organism regulate protein expression and cellular development without regulatory elements or developmental mechanisms?
and Roy responded
they didn't
So they'd be more dead than a dead dog. Like taking a bunch of parts without any means of assembly, not to mention the parts are not in the right proportions, possibly missing parts as well at a critical time. Essentially a junkyard....
Where are the HARD questions?
I was assuming they were hard because the answer required that the result was a living organism, apparently that implicit requirement was lost upon you. :-)scordova
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
07:11 PM
7
07
11
PM
PDT
1. Slowly. The ribosomes merely augment the protein formation process, they aren’t strictly necessary for it. Proteins could be formed by tRNA molecules binding to codons as they are now,
Your response was awfully dismissive, and for the reader's benefit, I'll point out why the above dismissive response creates more problems than it solves. What codons does that supposed tRNA bind to if there is no mRNA strand to provide codons? A codon that is part of an mRNA sequence that came from where? The mRNA sequence usually comes from the work of an RNA polymerase (a protein) reading a DNA strand (a DNA strand by the way has to come from somewhere), and a DNA polymerase needs to be formed by what mechanism before ribosomes evolve? And DNA needs proteins like DNA polymerase to make them, and those proteins (like DNA polymerase) came from where without ribosomes and DNA? Where does the tRNA come from in a non-RNA world? How will a aminoacyl-tRNA be formed without a aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (which are themselves proteins)? How will aminoacyl-tRNA floating around break the bonds between the amino acid and tRNA and then polymerize the amino acid into an folded functional protein without a ribosome? Where will the sequencing for aminoacyl-tRNAs synthetases come from without DNA that provides a template for the mRNA, and even if the DNA is present, then they can't come about without a ribosome? If you assume a random mRNA, this will make a random amino acid polymer, and a random amino-acid polymer does not a protein make. Speculations abound, but has anybody poured a random mix of amino acids, tRNAs and expect to get a sufficient protein generating machine in place? The closest thing we have are things like a recently dead dog, and you yourself said dead dogs stay dead dogs.scordova
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
06:51 PM
6
06
51
PM
PDT
Interesting to read the two long replies above.From two very different perspectives...! Am not a scientist, but I've long wondered how, when I hear about the Genome project,anyone can tell me with a straight face...that the super detailed DNA just sorta "happened".vikingmom
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
06:42 PM
6
06
42
PM
PDT
Roy asks about the hard questions, while not exactly answering the OP with anything really substantial. Here are a few more, with added commentary. FACTS AND QUESTIONS ? Fact: All scientific research indicates that life cannot spring from nonliving matter. Question: What is the scientific basis for saying that the first cell sprang from nonliving chemicals? ? Fact: Researchers have recreated in the laboratory the environmental conditions that they believe existed early in the earth’s history. In these experiments, a few scientists have manufactured some of the molecules found in living things. Question: If the chemicals in the experiment represent the earth’s early environment and the molecules produced represent the building blocks of life, whom or what does the scientist who performed the experiment represent? Does he or she represent blind chance or an intelligent entity? ? Fact: Protein and RNA molecules must work together for a cell to survive. Scientists admit that it is highly unlikely that RNA formed by chance. The odds against even one protein forming by chance are astronomical. It is exceedingly improbable that RNA and proteins should form by chance in the same place at the same time and be able to work together. Question: What takes greater faith—to believe that the millions of intricately coordinated parts of a cell arose by chance or to believe that the cell is the product of an intelligent mind? RNA is required to make proteins, yet proteins are involved in the production of RNA. How could either one arise by chance, let alone both? Roy also mentions that evolution involves some trade-offs (such as something being advantageous but not essential). Human manufacturers often have to sacrifice quality to produce an item at a fast pace. How is it possible, then, that cells can reproduce so fast and so accurately if they are the product of undirected accidents? Here are a few more: ? Fact: DNA is packaged within the chromosomes in a manner so efficient that it has been called a “feat of engineering.” Question: How could such order and organization arise by undirected chance events? ? Fact: DNA’s capacity to store information still has no equal in today’s computer age. Question: If human computer technicians cannot achieve such results, how could mindless matter do so on its own? ? Fact: DNA contains all the instructions needed to build a unique human body and maintain it throughout life. Question: How could such writing come about without a writer, such programming without a programmer? ? Fact: For DNA to work, it has to be copied, read, and proofread by a swarm of complex molecular machines called enzymes, which must work together with precision and split-second timing. Question: Do you believe that highly complex, highly reliable machinery can come about by chance? Without solid proof, would not such a belief amount to blind faith?Barb
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
05:05 PM
5
05
05
PM
PDT
1. Slowly. The ribosomes merely augment the protein formation process, they aren't strictly necessary for it. Proteins could be formed by tRNA molecules binding to codons as they are now, it'd just be less reliable. Don't forget that (i) many descriptions of the protein formation add the ribosome as an afterthought, since the process can be effectively described without mentioning it, and (ii) the current set-up has been evolving for a very long time with ribosomes present so could easily have become dependent on it, much like some-one who always walks with a stick may lose muscle power in their leg. 2. The same way they do when singly constrained. Since almost all evolution involves trades and balances, just about everything is polyconstrained anyway. 3. They didn't. 4. They didn't, it wasn't essential when it first evolved, when it first evolved it was advantageous but not essential. 5. One possibility is that RNA originally acted as a template for DNA rather than the other way around. I doubt we'll ever know exactly what did happen as opposed to what could happen. 6. Amino-acid homochirality would be dependent on exactly how protein formation first evolved. And who says the expectation is 50/50? Measurements of amino-acids in meteorites and on clay substrates show that it isn't. 7. Dead dogs don't become live dogs. This is an argument against Christianity; it has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. 8. See #1 9. (i) Less. (ii) That's gibberish. (iii) Very few. 10. ApoA 1 Milano. But who says new proteins have to be substantially new rather than variants on existing ones? Evolutionary biology certainly doesn't. Nevertheless, it's not hard to see how a totally new protein might evolve, given the ability of point mutations to create new starting loci for transcription, and the number of resulting orfan genes found. 11. Lactose tolerance, Apoa 1 milano, and maybe alcohol resistance too. The alternates to thalassaemia and sickle-cell traits might become fixed eventually if malaria is wiped out, though it'd be a slow process since they're both dominant genes. Timescale - billions of years if the population size is maintained, and possibly never if we manage interstellar colonies. Are these questions supposed to be hard? 12. It can't, it doesn't, and nobody ever said it did. Selection is always muddied by differing alleles elsewhere, to the extent that mildly deleterious traits can piggy-back by being associated with strongly beneficial ones. Random chance gets in the way too. 11. Generally, yes. No. No - C14 may result from nearby natural radioactivity, such as Uranium decay. Yet another loaded question. Also, proofread. 12. Yes, what about them, yes. This does not mean all the strata formed in a single year. These are not hard questions at all, and I wouldn't expect anyone with a background in evolutionary biology to even have to think hard about answering them, let alone get concerned that they couldn't. They're more likely to diminish one's opinion of the asker than of evolutionary biology. 13. I'll consider it if it happens. Until then, it's no more a problem for science than asking "What if Moses returns and she's female and tells the world that the Bible was written by a drunken con-artist with diarrhoea?" is a problem for religion. 14. I don't know (but I suspect Google does) but it doesn't matter since the measurement methods overlap in range and so each corroborates the next. The same as for supernovae of stars within galaxies. No, because probabilities don't sum that way. Where are the HARD questions? RoyRoy
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
03:58 PM
3
03
58
PM
PDT
Good questions. Thanks.Dionisio
April 7, 2014
April
04
Apr
7
07
2014
02:42 PM
2
02
42
PM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply