Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Biochemistry and molecular biology magazine describes protein origin as …

arroba Email

“Close to a miracle”:

Over all, what the field of protein evolution needs are some plausible, solid hypotheses to explain how random sequences of amino acids turned into the sophisticated entities that we recognize today as proteins. Until that happens, the phenomenon of the rise of proteins will remain, as Tawfik says, “something like close to a miracle.”

Chances are, it will still seem that way, actually. Lots of things for which there are plausible, solid hypotheses still seem that way.

Or, as a friend translates, “It would be a miracle if we believed in miracles.” 😉

Jon Garvey, the theist's miracle is basically equivalent to the non-theist's close-to-a-miracle. In other words, in the materialist worldview, close-to-a-miracle is as close to a miracle as it is possible to get. If an actual miracle were to occur in the universe of a non-theist, he would by necessity instantly slide into the universe of theism, where actual miracles can and do occur. Chance Ratcliff
I sensed a risible reluctance to utter THAT word, and I wouldn't know a peptide from a polo mint. They give themselves away all the time, don't they? Nervous that their whole world of fear will soon be turning into a whole world of pain. Axel
"Close to a miracle" is an interesting turn of phrase. Somebody recovers from untreatable cancer after prayer, and you'd likely call it a miracle. But spontaneous remission does happen occasionally, presumably from various natural causes - the miracle is in the association with prayer (and the fact such a rare event happened where you are). But protein formation, now: in the absence of anything but chance association of peptides, the probabilities are beyond the possibilities of the Universe. It would never happen. So why would that be "close to a miracle" rather than "beyond a miracle"? Jon Garvey
Related topic. Since, enzymes are proteins too. http://creation.com/world-record-enzymes-richard-wolfenden [Reaction]Rate enhancement by 10[^]18 Enzyme expert Dr Richard Wolfenden, of the University of North Carolina, showed in 1998 that a reaction ‘“absolutely essential” in creating the building blocks of DNA and RNA would take 78 million years in water’, but was speeded up 10[^]18 times by an enzyme.1 Rate enhancement by 10[^]21 In 2003, Wolfenden found another enzyme exceeded even this vast rate enhancement. A phosphatase, which catalyzes the hydrolysis of phosphate dianions, magnified the reaction rate by thousand times more than even that previous enzyme—10[^]21 times. That is, the phosphatase allows reactions vital for cell signalling and regulation to take place in a hundredth of a second. Without the enzyme, this essential reaction would take a trillion years—almost a hundred times even the supposed evolutionary age of the universe (about 15 billion years)!3 Implications Wolfenden said, ‘Without catalysts, there would be no life at all, from microbes to humans. It makes you wonder how natural selection operated in such a way as to produce a protein that got off the ground as a primitive catalyst for such an extraordinarily slow reaction.’1 Enjoy! ;) JGuy
We live in a miracle-haunted world. Mung

Leave a Reply