Intelligent Design

An Evolutionist Just Gave Up On a Fundamental Just-So Story (And Then Made Up Another to Replace it)

Spread the love

Which came first the chicken or the egg? In evolution’s case, the question is between DNA or proteins. The DNA stores the data to make the proteins, but proteins do things (like get the data out of the DNA). It is all so circular: proteins operate on DNA to get the data to make … themselves. When a new individual is conceived, the zygote has both already in place to begin with. But how could this whole biological system evolve from a mud patch? And which came first, DNA or proteins? Twenty five years ago evolutionists hit upon a new just-so story to solve this riddle: It wasn’t DNA or proteins, but RNA, that worked the magic. RNA is what the proteins create when they get the data out of the DNA. They create a copy, RNA, which chemically is slightly different. Evolutionists were excited about RNA because it can store data like DNA, and it can do things like proteins. It does both, so in the beginning it was an RNA world. It was common to see evolutionists hail this idea as solving those difficult origins problems. One experiment had evolutionists exclaiming that it was “extremely strong evidence for the RNA world.” Here’s how Wikipedia explains the concept: Read more

One Reply to “An Evolutionist Just Gave Up On a Fundamental Just-So Story (And Then Made Up Another to Replace it)

  1. 1
    scordova says:

    Given the failure of the RNA world hypothesis, this demonstrates that Nick Matke blows it again, recall he said:

    Here is a short list of things we have discovered or confirmed in the last 50 years or so pertaining to the origin of life. In my opinion all of these points have reached high enough confidence that they are unlikely to change much with future discoveries, and our confidence in them does not depend in uncertainties in the remaining unanswered questions.
    ….
    OOL Discovery #3. DNA/RNA/protein-based life was preceded by something even simpler, an RNA world or at least an RNA-heavy world.

    Nick Matzke
    What critics of critics of neo-creationists get wrong
    July 2008
    Pandas Thumb

Leave a Reply