mrh@cybvax0.UUCP (Mike Huybensz) (05/28/85)
In article <363@iham1.UUCP> rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) writes: > C. NEW RESEARCH SHOWS THAT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR LIFE ARE SO > COMPLEX THAT CHANCE AND EVEN BILLIONS OF YEARS CANNOT EXPLAIN > IT. > > 31. DNA can only be produced with the help of certain enzymes. > But these enzymes can only be produced at the direction of > DNA [a]. Since each requires the other, a satisfactory > explanation for the origin of one must also explain the > origin of the other [b,c]. Likewise, some proteins are > required to produce other proteins. Apparently the entire > manufacturing system came into existence simultaneously. > This implies Creation. Here we have a classic fallacy of argument: transformation of a possible to an absolute. Note the two "only"s in the first two sentences. Neither is necessarily true. In today's organisms, DNA is produced only with the help of certain enzymes: it may have been produced differently in the past. In today's organisms, enzymes are usually produced at the direction of DNA. However, polypeptides (some of which may have enzymatic activity) can be produced spontaneously (as in the Miller/Urey experiments.) Thus, the conclusion is logically invallid. > c) ''The origin of the genetic code presents formidable > unsolved problems. The coded information in the > nucleotide sequence is meaningless without the > transition machinery, but the specification for this > machinery is itself coded in the DNA. Thus without the > machinery the information is meaningless, but without > the coded information the machinery cannot be > produced! This presents a paradox of the ''chicken and > egg'' variety, and attempts to solve it have so far > been sterile.'' [John C. Walton, (Lecturer in > Chemistry, University of St. Andrews Fife, Scotland), > ''Organization and the Origin of Life,'' ORIGINS, Vol. > 4, No. 1, pp. 30-31.] An apparent paradox only. The chicken/egg paradox can be answered several ways: a Creationist could say gawd created one first; an evolutionary biologist could say the reptile and reptile egg preceeded them both, gradually evolving into chicken and chicken egg. Must reading for this subject is in this month's (June) Scientific American: "The First Organisms" by A.G. Cairns-Smith, pp 90-100. He presents two key ideas: 1) Origin of a system of cooperating parts (such as an arch) may be due to an extraordinary event such as all the stones falling into the right positions at one time, or it may be due to scaffolding which is later removed. 2) Genetic takeover: original genes of an unknown first genetic material (he suggests clays) evolved more and more complex phenotypes until a new type of gene (part of the phenotype) appeared. Eventually, the new type of gene took over, and the old type was gradually lost. There is a bibliography on pg. 136. -- Mike Huybensz ...decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!cybvax0!mrh