Design and Logos in Biology: A. E. Wilder Smith

DNA
"Did the code and means of translation it appear simultaneously in evolution? It seems almost incredible that any such coincidences could have occurred, given the extraordinary complexities of both sides and the requirements that they be coordinated accurately for survival. By a pre-Darwinian (or a skeptic of evolution after Darwin) this is a puzzle surely would have been interpreted as the most powerful sort of evidence for special creation." *C. Haskins, "Advances and Challenges in Science" in American Scientist 59 (1971), pp. 298.

"The code is meaning unless translated. The modern cell's translations amchinery consists of at least fifty macromolecular compoents which are themselves encoded in DNA [!]; the code cannot be trnslated otherwise than by products of translation. It is the Modern expression of omne vivum ex ovo ['every living thing comes from an egg']. When and how did this circle become closed? It is exceedingly difficult to imagine." *J. Monod, Cahnce and Necessity (1971), p. 143

"The information content of amino acid seguences cannot increase until a genetic code with an adapter function has appeared. Nothing which even vaguely resembles a code exists in the physio-chemical world. One must conclude that no valid scientific explantion of the origin of life exists at present." *H. Yockey, "Self Organization Origin of Life Scenarios and information Theory". in Journal of Theoretical Biology 91 (1981), p. 13.

"Cells and organisms are also informed [intelligently designed and operated] life-supported systems. The basic compoent of any informed system is its plan. Here, argues the creationist, an impenetrable circle excludes the evolutionist. Any attempt to form a model or theory of the evolution of the genetic code is futile because that code is without function unless, and until, it is translated, i.e., unless it leads to the synthesis of proteins. But the machinery by which the cell translates the code consists of about seventy compoents which are themselves the product of code." *Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution (1984), p. 147 [emphasis his] .

RNA
"The code in the gene (which is DNA, of course) is used to construct a messenger RNA molecule in which is encoded the message necessary to determine the specific amino acid sequence of the protein.
"The cell must synthesize the sub-units (nuleotides) for the RNA (after first synthesizing the individual bases and the ribose). The cell must synthesize the sub-units, or amino acids, which are eventually polymerized to form the protein. Each amino acid must be activated by an enzyme specific for that amino acid-s-RNA complexes are used to form a protein. Other enzymes and key molecules are required for this.
"During all of this, the complex energy-producing apparatus of the cell is used to furnish the energy required for the many syntheses." Duane T. Gish, "DNA: Its History and Potential, "in W.E. Lemmerts (ed.), Scientific Studies in Special Creation (1971), p. 213.




"All this is striking similar to the situation in the living cell. For discs or tapes subsitute DNA; for 'words' substitute genes; and for 'bits, (a bit is an electronic resentation of 'yes' or 'no') substitute the bases adenine, thymine, quanine and cytosine." *Fred Hoyle and *C. Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space (1981), p. 106.

"In bacteria, for example, Jacob and Monod demostrated a control system that operates by switching off 'repressor' molecules, i.e., unmasking DNA at the correct 'line number' to read off the correct (polypeptide) subroutines. With eukaryotes [a common type of bateria], Brittenand and Davidson have tentatively suggested that 'sensor genes' react to an incoming stimulus and cause the production of RNA. This, in turn activates a 'producer gene', m-RNA is synthesized and the required protein eventually assembled as a ribosome. Many DNA base sequences may thus be involved, not in protein or RNA production, but in control over that production--in switching the right sequences on or off at the right time." *Michael Pitman, Adam and Evolution (1984), p. 124.

Mathematics, Probabilities and DNA
http://www.warneveryone.com/mathematics_probabilities_dna.htm
Spontaneous Generation
http://www.warneveryone.com/spontaneous_generation.htm
DNA and RNA
http://www.warneveryone.com/dna_rna.htm

Quotes by Evolutionary Scientists Against Evolution - http://www.warneveryone.com/evolution_scientists_quotes.htm

Live broadcasting with instant message - http://www.justin.tv/warneveryone

KJV1611 Bible - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=authorizedversion&search=Search

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• crxxxev
• Wilder-Smith
• EPIPHANY
• COSMOS
• NAUTILOID
• GENE
• creation
• evolution
• Dinosaur
• whales
• stars
• moon
• earth
• comets

[zenithar6666]

if you thik taht then you havent even a highschool understanding my freind

[420BurnaBlunt]

I am pursuing a degree in Biomedical Science. I know the truth lies between God and evolution. Explaining why something Is (exists) does not make the significance of everything in the universe any less grand. When you get down to the debate whether Existance, life, humanity, self awareness, Consciousness, and everything that exists is an ACCIDENT, or DESIGN; you have to be a fool to not see the obvious overarching design in the incredible complexity of existance. Self-Awareness is "God."

[Andrea2rose]

Video stopping at 34:48

[tboneal83]

great video.. i sat through the whole thing. lol

he makes great points.

[fhattest]

science is still a theory,it has created many things good and bad,but these atheist scientologists have become what they always hated about religious people,arrogant people that think they know it all,no matter how far you go down your origins of life the bottom line is something or someone created it

[MATZAMAN76]

Yeah, you are right,....since we cant do it...then it must be god....Yeah, much better logic. LOL

The "god of the gaps" argument is not an argument. Creationist arguments are baseless, tired and at best laughable.

Remember, the burden of proof lies with those who claim there is a god. Science does NOT claim to know everything. As time goes on, it learns more and more. It is those who claim god that are truly the arrogant ones. Faith implies no evidence. You have nothing but your imagination.

[Kylehintz87]

as soon as you can create life, or anything close to a DNA cell in a lab, then we can talk.

See the blindness of your logic. We cant even synthesize a DNA molecule by randomness. It takes intricate knowledge of biochemistry along with many other things.

[Yalf111]

turned off after he said "jesus said...."

shut down, bzzz

[smpaudio]

"Selection" in evolution refers to an unguided and naturally occurring phenomenon. It does NOT imply that a deity doing the selecting. This is why it is called "NATURAL selection."

Intelligent Design is NOT a feature of selection, and even if someone wants to apply an overly liberal definition to the word "Design", it is scientifically useless to do so; since the process is still natural and unguided, referring to it as a "natural design" doesn't change the fact that a god wasn't involved.

[MATZAMAN76]

You lost me at jesus......

As soon as you get jesus or yahweh in the LAB...let me know,...then we can talk.