Intelligent Design

Did Horizontal Gene Transfer Create Evolution?

Spread the love

It is common knowledge that evolution is supposed to be caused by random biological variation that helps with reproductive success. By definition such biological variation is more likely to be passed on to later generations and eventually to become established in a population. And, according to the theory, if such variation accumulates it leads to all kinds of biological novelties. One problem, however, is that biological variation is not for free. It arises as a consequence of sophisticated molecular machinery and this forces evolutionary theory to violate science’s dictum of simplicity. Scientific explanations should not consist of a series of coincidences and lucky strikes. In Darwin’s day the knowledge of biology was sufficiently rudimentary that this free lunch problem could be overlooked. But the twentieth century dispelled any such notion that biological variation is a freebie. And recent research has made the problem even worse.  Read more

4 Replies to “Did Horizontal Gene Transfer Create Evolution?

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    Dr. Hunter I like this quote of yours,

    ‘Like a Newton-Raphson search, the algorithm nicely tracked to more advantageous codes. Of course there is no evidence that the world so long ago just happened to provide for such an algorithm. But that has never stopped evolutionists.’

    This is just precious, a computer program was ‘Intelligently Designed’ to prove evolution.,,, Shame that the sheer irony is lost on neo-Darwinists.

  2. 2
    bornagain77 says:

    Dr. Hunter, Now perhaps they can devise an algorithm to figure out how the 20 different codes found in life came work together in integrated fashion:

    “In the last ten years, at least 20 different natural information codes were discovered in life, each operating to arbitrary conventions (not determined by law or physicality). Examples include protein address codes [Ber08B], acetylation codes [Kni06], RNA codes [Fai07], metabolic codes [Bru07], cytoskeleton codes [Gim08], histone codes [Jen01], and alternative splicing codes [Bar10].
    Donald E. Johnson – Programming of Life – pg.51 – 2010

    ,, Something tells me that this problem of fitting the 20 different codes together in the proper ‘parallel’ way, will not be nearly so conducive to their algorithm, nor do I believe it to be conducive to any other ‘evolutionary’ algorithm that man may devise:

    Here, we show that the universal genetic code can efficiently carry arbitrary parallel codes much better than the vast majority of other possible genetic codes…. the present findings support the view that protein-coding regions can carry abundant parallel codes.
    http://genome.cshlp.org/content/17/4/405.full

    The data compression of some stretches of human DNA is estimated to be up to 12 codes thick (12 different ways of DNA transcription) (Trifonov, 1989). (This is well beyond the complexity of any computer code ever written by man). John Sanford – Genetic Entropy

    The multiple codes of nucleotide sequences. Trifonov EN. – 1989
    Excerpt: Nucleotide sequences carry genetic information of many different kinds, not just instructions for protein synthesis (triplet code).
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2673451

    The Coding Found In DNA Surpasses Man’s Ability To Code – Stephen Meyer – video
    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4050638

  3. 3
    Ilion says:

    BA77: “Now perhaps they can devise an algorithm to figure out how the 20 different codes found in life came work together in integrated fashion: …

    Last I heard, it’s 22 … which means that there is no chemical necessity that *this* codon code for *that* amino acid.

  4. 4
    Ilion says:

    Clearly, I should have read further, as the “codes” BA77 was talking about are not the relationships between DNA codons and the amino acids “coded” by them.

    Nevertheless, the point I made holds.

Leave a Reply