Page 260 - If Darwin Had Known about DNA

Harun Yahya

258

In the absence of a cell with the mechanism to read the informa-
tion in DNA-and to act on those instructions and manufacture protein-

the information in DNA will be meaningless. Even if we assume the
completely impossible, that the DNA molecule did form spontaneous-
ly under the primitive world conditions suggested by evolutionists, the
existence of DNA by itself would be meaningless.
Despite being evolutionists, Prof. David E. Green and Prof. Robert
F. Goldberger express the invalidity of the idea that the cell emerged
gradually and spontaneously:

. . . the macromolecule-to-cell transition is a jump of fantastic dimensions,
which lies beyond the range of testable hypothesis. In this area, all is con-
jecture. The available facts do not provide a basis for postulating that cells
arose on this planet. 210
In an article titled "Life's Origins Get Murkier and Messier," pub-
lished in The New York Times in June 2000, the science writer Nicholas
Wade wrote, "Everything about the origin of life on earth is a mystery,
and it seems the more that is known, the more acute the puzzles get." 211
The biochemist Prof. Michael J. Behe summarizes the position of sci-
ence in terms of the evolutionary scenario:

In private, many scientists admit that science has no explanation for the
beginning of life. On the other hand, many scientists think that given the
origin of life, its subsequent evolution is easy to envision, despite the ma-
jor difficulties outlined in this book. The reason for this peculiar circum-
stance is that while chemists try to test origin-of-life scenarios by experi-
ment or calculation, evolutionary biologists make no attempt to test evo-
lutionary scenarios at the molecular level by experiment or calculation.
As a result, evolutionary biology is stuck in the same frame of mind that
dominated origin-of-life studies in the early fifties before most experi-
ments had been done: imagination running wild. Biochemistry has, in
fact, revealed a molecular world that stoutly resists explanation by the
same theory so long applied at the level of the whole organism. Neither