Biblical Creation vs. Evolution

[Soldier4Christ]

BARE FACTS ON BEAR HAIR follow questions about a recent report of a hybrid
between a grizzly bear and a polar bear (see "Wild Grolar Bear Found", Evidence
News, 31st May 2006). A number of our readers have asked us how can we explain
the fact that polar bears seem so well designed to live and hunt in a harsh
environment filled with ice and snow, if the world was created good and ice and
snow were not on earth till after Noah's Flood. The standard evolutionary
explanation is polar bears evolved white hair as an adaptation to camouflage
them so their prey doesn't see them until it is too late. It has also been
widely stated that the white hairs act like fibre-optic filaments and convey
sunlight to their skin, which is black, to help keep the bear warm. This last
suggestion was tested by Daniel Koon, physicist at St. Lawrence University in
New York, who obtained some polar bear hair from a New York zoo and measured how
much light of different wavelengths could travel through the length of an
individual hair. He found that less than 0.001% of light was conveyed through
the hairs. Koon's experiment is reported in Applied Optics, 37, 3198-3200
(1998).

ED. COM. The main prey of polar bears is seals, which they catch when the seals
come up for air in gaps in the sea ice. Seals would only see a shadow through
the ice if they see anything. Being white would not disguise this, so the
evolving camouflage story doesn't really make sense. Polar bears are also
scavengers and will eat any dead animals and birds they come across, and in the
summer they will eat kelp and berries. They don't need to be camouflaged to
catch dead things or ambush berries. Polar bears are better explained by the
Biblical history of the world, which tells us the world started out good, but
has gone bad. Air cavities and lack of melanin are what causes "grey" hairs in
aging people and animals. These hairs are actually white. Thus, white hair is
produced by loss of function, and is no help to the theory of evolution, but
fits with Genesis. The fibre-optic story was a nice idea, but it must be
consigned to an "urban myth" list. It is infra-red light that gives heat from
the sun, not visible light, and there isn't enough light of any wavelength in
the arctic to a keep a polar bear warm. The reason polar bear hair appears white
is that it does not have melanin pigment, plus it has cavities filled with air
within the hair shafts which scatter light. After Noah's flood bears and humans
spread out through North America and due to degeneration of genes some bears
(and humans) lost their ability to make pigment in the hair and became white.
But white bears would stand out in green forests and grasslands, and although no
other animals would hunt them for food, humans would. Therefore, white bears
would be disadvantaged in places where humans live, but could survive in places
where humans rarely went as long as they could find food, such as the high
arctic. Thus, white polar bears are the result of degeneration, selection,
adaptation and survival of fittest, but not evolution.

[Soldier4Christ]

HUMAN EVOLUTION GENES FOUND, according to reports in ScienceNOW, news@nature,
Nature Advanced  Online Publications 16 Aug 2006, and BBC News Online and The
Independent 17 Aug 2006. A team of researchers led by biostatistician Katherine
Pollard have compared sections of the human genome to that of chimps and several
other animals to search for gene changes that could explain how humans evolved
larger brains. They found a group of genes called HAR genes that showed a large
difference between the chimp and human versions. They studied one of these genes
called HAR1 in humans, chimps and several other vertebrates. In one sequence of
118 letters they found 18 differences between the chimp and human version.
Katherine Pollard commented: "It's evolving incredibly rapidly. It's really an
extreme case. We found 18 differences between chimps and humans, which is an
incredible amount of change to have happened in a few million years." When they
compared the chimp genome with other vertebrates they found very few
differences. For example, there were only two changes between chickens and
chimps, who are believed to be separated by 310 million years of evolution. The
HAR1 gene is most active when the cerebral cortex, or outer layer of the brain,
is forming. This is the layer of cells involved in complex distinctively human
functions such as language, and consciousness. The other surprising thing about
the HAR1 gene is that it is not a protein coding gene. Previous attempts to find
genes that explain the difference between human and ape brains have concentrated
on differences in proteins. In 2004 a gene called ASPM, which also
has a function in forming the cerebral cortex, was found to be distinctly
different between chimps and humans and scientists claimed that it helped create
the human brain from an ape brain. The HAR1 gene was found in one of the
regions in between genes that had been written off as being non-functional. The
researchers have not identified a function for the gene, but they have found
that it codes for a short strand of RNA - a molecule similar to DNA that is
used to transfer genetic information around the cell. Pollard's team suspect the
RNA coded by the HAR1 gene is used in regulating proteins involved in organising
the cerebral cortex.



ED. COM. This is a classic example of the difference between observation and
assumption. The differences in DNA letters (and the RNA they code for) are real
scientific observations. However, the claim that one gene changed into the chimp
and human varieties of the gene over a period of six million years is a pure
faith belief, based on an apriori belief in evolution. No-one has observed any
genes changing from one to the other. The fact that the gene was found in a
non-protein coding region is also significant. Non-protein coding DNA used to be
called "junk DNA," and was written off as useless evolutionary leftovers.
However, scientists are now recognising that these regions could code for many
control mechanisms, such as the RNA molecule found in the research described
above, that is why chimps aren't reading this report and you are. The real
differences between kinds of living creatures lie in how they are put together,
rather than what they are made from. As shown in this research, genes that code
for small RNA molecules can be quite small, but they have a big effect. This is
further proof that the 98 percentage similarity between chimp and the human DNA
claimed by the evolutionists is meaningless, even if it was true.

[Soldier4Christ]

FOX NEWS: Nearly Complete ‘Missing Link’ Skeleton Found in Ethiopia

A fossilized skeleton discovered in 2000 received significant press this week due to its new status as a “missing link.” The fossil was found embedded in sediment and scientists have spent the past several years carefully removing the bones, a process still incomplete.

The fossil, nicknamed “Selam,” has drawn attention because of its classification as an Australopithecus afarensis (which includes the famous “Lucy” skeleton), and because Selam is estimated to have been only three when she died.

One of the more interesting aspects of the find is that scientists believe Selam was buried rapidly by floodwaters. (See A.I.G. Q&A on fossils to learn about how the Flood created most of the fossil record.)

Scientists believe A. afarensis such as Selam were missing links because of skeletal indications that they were upright walkers, whereas many other features are distinctly ape-like, including the shoulder blades, neck, organ of balance in the inner ear, fingers and hyoid bone (which attaches to muscles of the tongue).

Of course, even if this creature did walk upright, as some believe, this provides no indication that humans evolved from it. Similarity in features or behavior is as much evidence of common design as it is of common descent.

An upcoming article on www.AnswersInGenesis.org will take an in-depth look at Selam, and the conclusions anthropologists can extrapolate based on individual skeletons.

[Soldier4Christ]

National Geographic News: “Walking” Sharks Among 50 New Species Found in Indonesia Reefs

A diving discovery of more than 50 new marine species off the coast of Indonesia made headlines early this week, along with the announcement that one of the newly discovered animals was a “walking shark,” which hints at evolutionist’s ideas of a fish-to-amphibian transitional form:

    Biologists studying these sharks suggest they could serve as models for the first animals that moved from marine environments onto land[.]

First of all, most news articles refer to “walking” sharks, with quotation marks around walking, to clarify that these sharks are not actually bearing weight on their fins, but rather simply appear to be walking. In the water, animals can propel themselves through the water without having to directly support their weight (since they’re surrounded by liquid); on land, limbs must support the weight of an animal’s body against gravity. As can be seen in a video, the shark is using fins in a unique way—but could not walk onto shore with much success. For legs to evolve from fins, the addition of significant muscle and bone mass—all organized properly with respect to the skeletal and muscular system—would be required.

Second, there is no reason at this point to believe that these sharks’ abilities represent an increase in genetic information, which would be required for molecules-to-man evolution to occur. Instead, this could be similar to a macaque who walked exclusively upright due to health problems. But this unusual behavior (presuming—for good reason—no increase in genetic information) is nothing like evolution unless one accepts the long-discredited theory of Lamarckianism, which theorized that use/disuse resulted in evolution (for example, postulating that a man who spent his time bodybuilding would have offspring who were more muscular).

As with other transitional forms, one must presuppose the evolutionary worldview in order to accept a form as transitional—otherwise, there is no way to know if it is truly the descendent of a simpler organism.

[Soldier4Christ]

The Cincinnati Post: Kevin Eigelbach: Answers in Genesis raises questions

Cincinnati Post religion writer Kevin Eigelbach took issue with a recent Answers Update e-newsletter (a free, weekly Answers in Genesis mailing), alleging—among other things—that the e-newsletter implied evolutionists couldn’t be Christians. Eigelbach sarcastically asks:

    [W]ho am I to speak, since in AIG’s view, the devil has blinded me to the truth and I refuse to submit to God?

Eigelbach is referring to the closing comments of the September 2nd Answers Update:

    But the evidence from the rock layers fits with what the Bible tells us concerning the judgment of the Flood. It is obvious these layers were laid down catastrophically, not slowly. But evolutionists deliberately choose to ignore the obvious—why? They have been blinded by the god of this world and don’t want to submit to the God of the Bible!

Answers in Genesis is merely pointing out that if the evidence clearly points to a global flood, and evolutionists ignore the obvious, then it must be because the evolutionists are being influenced by something unscientific (after all, scientists are “supposed to” accept whatever the evidence points to, right?). What reason would there be for a scientist to reject something that the evidence points to? The answer is that a different worldview is influencing these scientists—one that does not honor God and whose root is a deception that ultimately denies the gospel.

Furthermore, Mr. Eigelbach states that the passage the e-newsletter concerned, in 2 Peter 3, “refers to the Second Coming of Jesus,” and “doesn’t concern evolution at all.” Now, it is certainly true that the passage does deal with the Second Coming. But read verses 4–7:

    “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our fathers died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water. By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. (2 Peter 3:4–7)

Quite obviously, that passage is discussing eschatology. But does this mean it has nothing to do with creation or the Flood? The passage clearly states that people willingly forget two things—“that long ago by God’s word the heavens existed and the earth was formed out of water and by water,” and that “the world of that time was deluged and destroyed.” In other words, people “deliberately choose to ignore the obvious” when it comes to creation and the Flood and “are blinded,” as we stated in the September 2nd Answers Update (see also Ephesians 4:18; 2 Corinthians 4:4).

Does Answers in Genesis believe evolutionists can’t be Christians. No—see What should a Christian think about evolution?, but we do clearly state in our Statement of Faith that:

    The doctrines of Creator and Creation cannot ultimately be divorced from the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Thus, in short, our stance on the issue is that a Christian can believe in evolution, but that such a belief contradicts the foundation of the faith and can quickly lead to compromising on the rest of God’s Word. For more details, see Creation: Why It Matters.

[Soldier4Christ]

Mature at Birth: Universe Discredits Evolution

Critics of recent creation ridicule the belief that a universe so vast, composed of so many diverse phenomena and processes running at diverse rates, could be fit into a few thousand years. They are less likely to acknowledge the many and severe problems with an old, evolutionary universe. Some of these problems have become accentuated in recent months. Any cosmological system is going to have its share of challenging phenomena to explain. Before casting stones, a little humility is in order.

A strange cartoon graced the cover of Science News last fall (10/08/2005) that serves as a symbol for a whole class of problems for evolutionary astronomers. It showed a star-shaped old man in a stellar maternity ward. With its title, "Crisis in the Cosmos? Galaxy-formation theory is in peril," the article exposed a running theme in astronomy: as far back as we look, stars and galaxies appear mature.

"Imagine peering into a nursery and seeing, among the cooing babies, a few that look like grown men," Ron Cowen quipped. "That's the startling situation that astronomers have stumbled upon as they've looked deep into space and thus back to a time when newborn galaxies filled the cosmos."

Other recent findings echo this theme of "mature at birth." Consider three examples from March of this year:

    * The Spitzer Space Telescope found clusters of galaxies a third of the assumed age of the universe.
    * UV and infrared surveys found "ubiquitous" galaxies at redshift 6.7, corresponding to 5% the assumed age.
    * The Swift satellite detected a gamma-ray burst 12.8 billion years old in the assumed time scale. "This means," said Nature (3/9/2006, p. 164) "that not only did stars form in this short period of time after the Big Bang, but also that enough time had elapsed for them to evolve and collapse into black holes."

More examples could be cited. These findings corroborate a January 8, 2002, NASA press release that was considered astonishing at the time: based on Hubble surveys, "the grand finale came first" in stellar and galactic evolution. As far back as telescopes look, they see mature creation, not evolution.

Add to this other problems with evolutionary views. Theories of star formation, galaxy formation, planet formation, globular cluster ages, universal expansion and much more—including some of the best-established ideas in astronomy—have had their share of upsets.

In a sense, this is how science works. No "fact" of science should be immune from challenge by new findings. What this teaches us, though, is that cockiness is out of order. Critics of recent creation should not be the first to throw stones.

Believers expect God's ways to be inscrutable. Creation involved unique processes that could have had unusual effects on our perceptions of space and time. Given the fallibility of human understanding, the reasonable approach in any area of science, especially the historical sciences of ultimate origins, should be to begin with the word of the Eyewitness.

[Soldier4Christ]

GIANT CAMEL FOUND, according to an article in ABC News in Science 9 Oct 2006.
Researchers from the University of Basel have found the bones of a giant camel
in the Syrian desert. The bones indicate the camel would have stood three metres
(10ft) high at the shoulders and had an overall height similar to a giraffe.
This makes it twice as tall as present day camels. The researchers have also
found human remains at the same site – a bone and a tooth. Jean-Marie le
Tensorer, one of the scientists who have been excavating the site commented:
"The bone is that of a Homo sapiens, or modern man, but the tooth is extremely
archaic, similar to that of a Neanderthal. We don't know yet what it is exactly.
Do we have a very old Homo sapiens, or a Neanderthal?" The site of the find is a
20 km (12.5 mile) wide gap between two mountains ranges with a numbers of
springs. The researchers suggest it was a savannah at the time and attracted
migrating herds. The fossils are believed to be 100,000 years old.

ED. COM. Here we have another example of a giant animal that has since shrunk.
This is change, but it is not evolution. Like the giant animals found all over
the world, it indicates the world was once a better place, able to sustain many
large animals. The region where it was found is now a desert, not a lush
savannah that could support migrating herds. If the human bone and tooth
belonged to the same individual they are further evidence that  Neanderthals
were fully human but suffered from bone and teeth deforming diseases, and if the
Dentist Jack Cuozzo is right in his book Buried Alive, both are evidence the
Neanderthals and the camels lived at a time when the environment enabled a much
longer life span. Both the camel and the human bones fit into Biblical history
(Genesis 1-12), which tells us the world started out very good but has
degenerated through time as a result of mans rebellion against the Creator.

[Soldier4Christ]

“BIBLICAL STYLE FLOOD” MADE BRITAIN, according to UK Daily Telegraph, 25 Sep
2006. Britain and continental Europe are believed to have been once connected by
a series of chalky hills, but Britain became an island when these were eroded
away. A sonar survey of the English Channel carried out by a team led by Sanjeev
Gupta, from Imperial College, London, has revealed a huge valley containing
“deep bowls, scour marks and piles of rubble on the sea bed that may have been
caused by a torrent of water.” Gupta suggests “the valley that now exists
between Britain and Europe was created by a catastrophic flood following the
breaching of the Dover Strait and the sudden release of water from a giant lake
to the north.” This could have made Britain into an island within 24 hours.

ED. COM. This research adds to the abundant evidence all over the earth of
catastrophic processes, and it reminds us that massive geological changes do not
need big time – they need big process. The movement of large masses of water can
account for many landforms we now see on earth, and it is interesting how deeply
embedded the idea is that a catastrophic flood is a“Biblical style flood”, an
obvious reference to Noah's Flood described in Genesis as having destroyed the
whole world in judgement of mankind's sin against God the Creator.

[Soldier4Christ]

MONSTER FOSSIL GRAVEYARD FOUND, according to articles in ABC (Australia) News
in Science, BBC Online News and Reuters News Service, 5 Oct 2006. Norwegian
scientists have found a “treasure trove” of huge marine reptile fossils in
Jurassic rocks on the Norwegian Island of Spitsbergen in the high Arctic. The
fossils are plesiosaurs, pliosaurs and ichthyosaurs, very similar to marine
reptile fossils found in southern England. One of the pliosaurs has been
nicknamed “The Monster” because its 3 metre (10ft) skull indicates it is the
largest pliosaur so far found. It has yet to be fully excavated but scientists
estimate it is between 8 and 10 metres (27-33ft) long. Jorn Harald Hurum,
co-director of the fieldwork, said that he was surprised by the density of
fossils at the site and that they are fully articulated whole skeletons, not
individual bones. He commented to Reuters: “It’s rare to find so many fossils in
one place – carcasses are food for other animals and usually get torn apart.”
The fossils are buried in fine grained black shale and the BBC article claims
“after death the carcasses came to rest in mud at the bottom of the deep ocean,
where little oxygen was present.” Hurum claims an “unusual chemistry in the mud”
could explain why they are so well preserved. He commented to the BBC:
"Something happened with the chemistry that's really good for bone preservation.
Some skeletons are pale white even though they're in black shale - they look
like 'roadkill'.


ED. COM. Hurum is correct about carcasses normally being torn up and eaten.
Therefore, they could not have sunk to the bottom of the sea and waited to be
slowly and gradually covered in mud and remained so well preserved. To preserve
the fossils in such good condition requires rapid deep burial so that
scavengers, bacteria and oxygen cannot destroy them. Furthermore to bury a lot
of monstrous creatures requires a monstrous amount of mud. This fossil site has
all the characteristics of a sudden, large catastrophic event which (a)
eliminates vast times form the Geologic record as only rapid events will
accumulate vast fossil beds and (b) this is the type of Catastrophic evidence
you would expect following the global flood of Noahs day and its disrupting
consequences over the following centuries. See Genesis 6-9

[Soldier4Christ]

FOSSIL BABY FOUND, according to BBC News Online, and every other popular
media service following a report in Nature vol. 443, p296, 21 Sep 2006 which
describes the finding of bones of a juvenile “Australopithecus afarensis”. The
bones include a skull, shoulder bones, some ribs and vertebrae, fragments of arm
and leg bones and the hyoid bone – a small fragile bone at the base of the
tongue. A CT (x-ray) scan on the skull shows un-erupted ape-like teeth,
indicating an age of approximately 3 years old. The leg bones indicate it could
have walked upright, but the scapulae (shoulder blades) are like those of a
gorilla and the finger bones are curved like those of tree-dwelling apes. The
hyoid bone is described by the researchers who studied it as being of “typical
African ape morphology”. The brain size is estimated at 330 cubic cm – similar
to that of a chimpanzee of the same age. This is between 68% and 88% of the
adult brain size for an Australopithecine – indicating a slower growth of the
brain than a chimpanzee. A three year old chimp has a brain 90% of adult size.
The bones were embedded in sandstone dated as 3.3 million years old, along with
numerous other mammals, reptiles and some fish. The researchers who found the
bones suggest they were rapidly buried in flood.


ED. COM. Many popular media reports such as evolutionary Icon National
Geographic, called this a FOSSIL CHILD and a human ancestor, just as they have
done for the most famous fossil of the same genus, named “Lucy”, (and another
adult) found April 2006. The new find certainly provides evidence the fossils
brain growth may have been slower than that of living apes, indicating an
extended childhood, and the legs of the new fossil indicate it could have walked
upright, (although the pelvis is needed to confirm this). However, these things
merely show that Australopithecines had some differences to living apes. It is
no proof that apes evolved into people. If a fossil creature has ape shaped
shoulder and finger bones, an apelike skull with ape shaped teeth and an ape
sized brain, plus a hyoid bone with “typical African ape morphology,” then it is
an ape. The professional scientists who studied it gave it a name that means
“southern ape” for that very reason – “Australo” means “southern” (as in
Australia), “pithecus” means “ape”.

[Soldier4Christ]

SWEET MALARIA CONTROL, according to an article in BBC News Online, 22 Sep
2006. A team of Scientists from Hebrew University are trying a new way of
controlling mosquito populations – by spraying plants with a sugar solution
containing an insecticide. Contrary to popular belief mosquitoes do not live on
blood, the male lives exclusively on nectar and plant juices from flowers, stems
and leaves, and the female enjoys mostly nectar etc, but she drinks blood when
she needs to get enough iron and protein to lay eggs. To see if the method would
work, the researchers sprayed acacia trees in an oasis, where there were few
other plants and there was a distinct and isolated mosquito population. Almost
the entire population was wiped out. Yosef Schlein, who led the study, suggested
that planting trees that are attractive to mosquitoes and spraying them with
sweet insecticide solution could help control malaria, especially in desert and
savannah regions, such as sub-Saharan Africa.

ED. COM. This research reminds us that the numerous diseases transmitted by
mosquito bites would not have been a problem in the original “very good” world
God created, where all animals, including insects, ate plants. The research
described above reminds us of this. However, the world did not stay very good
and the supply of nutrients from plants was drastically reduced following the
devastation caused by Noah’s flood. After the flood God gave humans permission
to eat animals, birds and fish, and animals also resorted to feeding from other
animals and humans when they could no longer obtain the nutrients they needed
from plants.

[Soldier4Christ]

PHOTOSYNTHESIS FOR SEA SLUGS described in an article in Science, vol 313,
p1229, 1 Sep 2006. Sea slugs are shell-less molluscs that eat soft corals. Some
sea slugs take in algae from the coral and house them in their digestive glands.
Ingo Burghardt of Ruhr University, Germany has studied a genus of sea slugs
named “Phyllodesmium” which hosts microscopic algae named zooanthellae and found
they formed a symbiotic relationship where the algae provide food for the sea
slug in return for being housed and protected. The algae also make the slugs
turn the same colour as the corals and Burghardt suggested that the relationship
between slugs and algae started as a means of providing camouflage for the
slugs, but it then evolved into a symbiotic relationship and the slugs evolved
larger, more complex digestive glands to provide living space for the algae. A
more extraordinary form of symbiosis occurs between a sea slug named “Elysia
chlorotica” and a seaweed named Vaucheria litorea”. Scientists at the University
of Maine have filmed juvenile sea slugs eating the seaweed and observed them
sucking chloroplasts, the complex cellular structures that carry out
photosynthesis, out of the algae. In spite of being removed from the plant cells
the chloroplasts continue to function inside the sea slug, a “pretty
spectacular” phenomenon, according to Margaret McFall-Ngai of the University of
Wisconsin, because the chloroplasts, (to keep functioning) need proteins that
are normally only made by plant cells. The University of Maine scientists have
found large parts of two plant genes in the DNA of the sea slug. They believe
the genes originally came from the seaweed and claim “We are seeing the
evolution of photosynthesis in an animal.” If the juvenile sea slugs don’t
extract chloroplasts from the seaweed “they don’t make it”.

ED. COM. Think again! No-one is actually seeing any evolution. No-one has
observed seaweed genes begin to move into sea slug DNA, so the belief they did
is pure faith. It makes just as much sense to believe that the sea slug always
had the genes to make use of chloroplasts, since Genesis states that all
creatures started out as vegetarians and in the sea that would limit your diet
to mostly algae full of chloroplasts, which is why juvenile sea slugs don’t make
it if they don’t get their first shot of algae. What is being seen is an unusual
way for an animal to get its food. The research described above indicates that
symbiosis in its many forms is a normal part of life, which fits well with The
Genesis record of God creating a well functioning world of complete complex life
forms.

[Soldier4Christ]

AUSTRALIA VS USA WAR ON HOBBITS as interview with Dr Colin Groves
(Australian National University) on ABC NEWS (Australia 2nd Oct 2006) began, "In
2003, Australian scientists unearthed the remains of a hobbit-like species, with
adults about the height of a three-year-old child, in a cave on a remote island
in Indonesia." Dr Groves rebutted claims by American scientists that bones found
in Indonesia nicknamed “Hobbits” were actually dwarf human beings with a brain
deformity. Groves claimed: “Aspects of the shape of the skull are completely
outside modern humans. The shape of the earhole in the skull, the shape of the
forehead and the back of the skull, all these things are way outside. The limb
proportions are quite different from those seen in any modern humans that I've
ever heard of.” Groves claims the bones are from a new species of humans.


ED. COM. Groves is right about the Hobbit bones being different from any modern
humans, because they are way outside the range of modern human dimensions.
However, he is wrong in classifying them as another species of human being. The
bones are more like ape bones than human bones, but there is no scientific or
popular media sensation in finding a dead ape. For more information about the
Hobbit bones from the original scientific reports contact
info@creationresearch.net and ask for the “Hobbit attachment” or search “hobbit”
or “floresiensis” on www.creationresearch.net.

[Soldier4Christ]

RE-DESIGNED DNA DOESN’T FIT, as noted in a brief item in Nature, vol. 440,
p604, 10 Aug 2006. The “D” in DNA stands for deoxyribose, a sugar molecule made
from a five sided ring of carbon atoms. Five sided sugars are called pentoses.
Most other sugar molecules, such as glucose, are made from six sided rings, and
are called hexoses. Chemists have speculated as to why DNA is made from a five
sided ring and suggested that the six sided ring would not enable the molecule
to form a compact double helix structure. The Journal Nature provides a summary
of a study described in J. Am. Chem. Soc. doi:10.1021/ja062548x (2006) as
follows: “Few would dispute the genius of DNA's chemical design. But some do
question why its backbone evolved to be made from chains of five- rather than
six-membered rings, when the latter might more easily be derived from common
sugars, such as glucose. Since the idea was first raised in the early 1990s,
chemists have suspected that sugars' hexose rings might simply be too bulky to
fit into DNA's neat structure. At last, Martin Egli of Vanderbilt University in
Nashville, Tennessee, and his colleagues have confirmed this experimentally.
They studied the crystal structure of double-stranded homo-DNA, which has hexose
in the backbone in place of DNA's deoxyribose. The result was a "slowly writhing
ribbon", the team reports, with irregular twists and steps between base pairs.”

ED. COM. This experiment reminds us that complex molecules like DNA can only be
made once the biochemical machinery to make the component parts already exists.
To make DNA, cells have to be able to make five-ringed sugars. This is further
evidence that DNA and RNA (also made with five ringed sugars) did not evolve by
chance before there were any cells to make them. It took clever creative
chemists to make the “6 ring” hexose version of DNA, which wouldn’t be suitable
for making a compact genetic information storage system. It took a much
cleverer, creative chemist to design the molecule that does work – and He didn’t
have to experiment first. Those who appreciate the “genius of DNA’s chemical
design” have no excuse for refusing to recognise the Genius who designed it and
give Him the honour he deserves.

[Soldier4Christ]

EVOLVING INTO OBLIVION, according to an article in ScienceNOW 21Sep 2006.
Male field crickets have a series of grooves on their wings, which they rub
together to make a characteristic chirping sound in order to attract a mate.
Unfortunately the chirping sound also attracts a parasitic fly that has recently
moved into the Hawaiian Islands where the “chirping” cricket population has been
rapidly declining. In 2003 ecologists at a research station on the Island of
Kauai noticed that although there was very little cricket chirping, there still
seemed to be plenty of crickets. They examined the crickets and found their
wings did not have the grooves needed to make the chirping sound. Further
research showed that over 90% of the male crickets on the island had a
“flatwing” mutation, so how did the crickets attract mates if they couldn’t
chirp? They suggested that silent “flatwing” males positioned themselves near
chirping males and then intercepted females attracted by chirps. To test this
idea they played cricket chirping through a loud speaker in a patch of grass,
and over 100 silent crickets were attracted to it. The researchers estimated the
crickets had developed the flatwing aberration in about 20 generations – an
amazingly fast change, according to evolutionary biologist William Cade of
University of Lethbridge, Canada. Another evolutionary biologist, Darryl Gwynne
of the University of Toronto says he’s waiting “with baited breath to see what
evolution is going to give us.”

ED. COM. To save Darryl Gwynne from holding his breath, Creation Research
predicts that the flies will eventually kill the normal chirping crickets and
select the mutant silent crickets as survivors which will shortly after,
probably die out from lack of mates. This is not evolution, although it is the
result of a structural change brought about by a mutation. The change from
grooved wings to flat wings in the crickets shows that change is real, but it is
change from complex to simple – the opposite of evolution. The change is the
result of degeneration, of both flies and crickets, and fits well into the
biblical history of the world of created perfection followed by degeneration.