Page 266 - Darwinism Refuted

DARWINISM REFUTED

enzymes had disappeared, then the cell would have died from lack of
nutrition.
2- Again, let us assume that all the impossible happened and that the
cell which is claimed to have been the ancestor of the chloroplast was
swallowed by the parent cell. In this case we are faced with another
problem: The blueprints of all the organelles inside the cell are encoded in
the DNA. If the parent cell were going to use other cells it swallowed as
organelles, then it would be necessary for all of the information about
them to be already present and encoded in its DNA. The DNA of the
swallowed cells would have to possess information belonging to the
parent cell. Not only is such a situation impossible, the two complements
of DNA belonging to the parent cell and the swallowed cell would also
have to become compatible with each other afterwards, which is also
clearly impossible.
3- There is great harmony within the cell which random mutations
cannot account for. There are more than just one chloroplast and one
mitochondrion in a cell. Their number rises or falls according to the
activity level of the cell, just like with other organelles. The existence of
DNA in the bodies of these organelles is also of use in reproduction. As the
cell divides, all of the numerous chloroplasts divide too, and the cell
division happens in a shorter time and more regularly.
4- Chloroplasts are energy generators of absolutely vital importance
to the plant cell. If these organelles did not produce energy, many of the
cell's functions would not work, which would mean that the cell could not
live. These functions, which are so important to the cell, take place with
proteins synthesized in the chloroplasts. But the chloroplasts' own DNA is
not enough to synthesize these proteins. The greater part of the proteins
are synthesized using the parent DNA in the cell nucleus. 327
While the situation envisioned by the endosymbiosis hypothesis is
occurring through a process of trial and error, what effects would this
have on the DNA of the parent cell? As we have seen, any change in a
DNA molecule definitely does not result in a gain for that organism; on
the contrary, any such mutation would certainly be harmful. In his book
The Roots of Life, Mahlon B. Hoagland explains the situation:

You'll recall we learned that almost always a change in an organism's DNA
is detrimental to it; that is, it leads to a reduced capacity to survive. By way

264