The Darwinian theory of Natural Selection has been accepted for many years now. Some scientists even prematurely accepted this theory as fact. However in 1993 a group of scientists from Berkley, Cambridge, Munich, and The University of Chicago have shown otherwise. The principal of Irreducible Complexity has been established that completely debunks Darwin’s theory of evolution labeling it as not being an adequate explanation for some of today’s findings.
Evolution is a fact, which has been observed. Simply, evolution is change and speciation due to change has been observed. The theory of evolution is not fact, but rather the theory that species in the past arose via random mutation and natural selection as is seen today.
Intel Design and IC have so far fallen short of refuting the Theory of Evolution (ToE). The mechanisms for ToE can be and have been observed. The mechanisms are:
1. Heritability: genetic traits must be passed on to subsequent generations.
2. Mutation: Imperfections in copying the DNA code or alteration by a genetic event such as horizontal gene transfer.
3. Natural selection: Ecological pressures that cause a differentiation in allele frequency.
All three of these have been observed, the only question is did it happen in the past?
The Darwinian Theory of Natural Selection states that nature is selective scrutinizing the slightest variations, rejecting those that are bad, preserving those that are good. He also states that if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight modifications, his theory would absolutely break down. Another theory called Biological Predestination attempted to give a continuous argument dealing with the origins of life without intelligent design which brings together a theory that proteins were chemically attracted to each other and formed a chain that then managed to fold itself into a molecular machine outside of a cell. Dr. Dean Kenyon, Author of Biochemical Predestination, when challenged to explain how proteins could be assembled without DNA instruction was unable to prove that they could and began to doubt his own theory.
Firstly, the theory of abiogenesis, which you seem to be alluding to, has no bearing on evolution. Evolution starts with the first replicator. The first replicator could have been formed by design, but no supernatural force has yet been observed that designs things in the physical world. Also, catalytic RNA may have played some role in the first replicator, proteins may not have played a part till later in evolution. If you are arguing a protein first theory of abiogenesis, you would have to rule out RNA and DNA as having a role in the first replicator. DNA/Protein and RNA/protein complexes are very common today and they MAY have been dependent on each other in the firs replicator, who knows.
Secondly, no IDist has ever shown that a protein mechanism could NOT be formed by evolution, or slight modification over time. The IC of the eye is a good example where evolutionary mechanisms can explain co-depedence and complexity. There are several threads that cover this on this site.
Darwin did his best with what he had at the time to explain what he had seen just as early man had tried to explain lightning and thunder as a supernatural event. However I am not saying that the supernatural does not exist. The principal of Irreducible Complexity has been proven best by the Bacterial Flagellum. This bacterium has the design of a motor, appropriately called a Flageller motor, which is much like ones found on a boat. A drive shaft, engine, and a quarter turn hook for a propeller are all present. Scientists don’t use these terms out of convenience but because that is what they are. If any one of these was not present at the same time the others came about, the propeller would not function and would do nothing to help in the survival of the bacterium and thus according to Darwinian Theory would not have been carried on to the offspring of the organism.
ID still has not ruled out less complex and rudimentary flagellar motors that may have existed in the distant past. You are right, all proteins in their current configuration must be there in order to function AS WE KNOW IT TODAY, but you must first show that proteins can not change function over time. An analogy would be American societial dependence on electricity. Without electricity large american cities would turn into chaos, yet we know that large cities existed in the past without electricity. Electricity did away with dependence on horses, wood for heat, and gas for lights. Things changed in a way that masked prior function and organization.
However another Idea had been spurned from Irreducible complexity. This theory is called co-option. Co-option states that possibly a cell can borrow existing parts from other cells to build a new mechanism. Molecular Biologist Scott Minnich from the University of Idaho would argue the contrary. Dr. Minnich states that in the case of the Bacterial Flagellum there are at least thirty parts that could not have come from other molecular machines and only ten that could have been borrowed. Dr. Minnich goes on to say plainly that the flageller motor could not have been a product of Darwinian Theories. So then how is it that this propeller exists? Maybe it was the product of some intelligent designer as the evidence suggests, say today’s Scientists.
Again, I would ask Dr. Minnich how he has proven that these molecular machines could not have arisen through other mechanisms, namely evolution through mutation and natural selection. It usually comes down to a tautology: IC is proven by IC. No physical mechanisms, other than mutation and natural selection, has ever been observed that would indicate design.
Furthermore The thought that proteins formed and joined together in a functional way in some primordial pool is way out there! Scientists have found that the only way proteins are formed into a functional way is in the cells of an already existing organism. Something called DNA goes through a process which is called transcription which copies the DNA into a separate strand. This separate strand is called messenger RNA. The RNA is then moved from the nucleus of the cell to the ribosome which manufactures a chain of amino acids. This chain of amino acids is then taken to a barrel shaped machine which folds the chain into a functioning molecular machine. After the amino acids are arranged this newly built molecular machine is then moved to the part of the cell where they are to do their job.
Actually, I have personally made proteins outside of cells. Well not exactly, I used E. coli lysate devoid of DNA to produce protein from an introduced plasmid. It's known as
in vitro protein expression . The system I used was from Roche, read more
here. It still uses systems derived from DNA, but is done in the absence of cells, or in a "primordial soup" situation.
And so the theory of Natural Selection and Biochemical predestination falls apart just as Darwin himself said and as Dean H. Kenyon knows. Leading Scientists to use a more observational method in examining evidence. They can no longer rule out Intelligent design as a possibility but must except what the evidence clearly shows.
As soon as we see IC systems appear in an organism today with no history of such an IC system, we may start to look at ID. That is, a completely new flagellar system appears in a lab strain of E. coli that has never been seen before. However, this has not happened. Secondly, you still have not stated how a supernatural being has manipulated DNA, or if it were a physical designer, who designed the first designer. The evidence still clearly shows effects of evolution, and not ID.
™ Version 4.2
