Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Hypothesis #1: Destroying the Cornerstone of the Evolutionary Hypothesis
The first diagram attempts to prove how evolution is false because specific traits cannot be passed from mother to offspring by way of DNA, and that Natural Selection is therefore moot.
In its attempt, the diagram tells us that, for instance, although DNA is responsible for making collagen, (a molecule which acts as "scaffolding" for our bodies in many different tissues, etc.), is is not responsible for the assembly of that collagen, and therefore evolution is impossible.
In rebuttel to this claim, I would like to remind/inform everyone that DNA most certainly is responsible for the assembly, growth, and maintenance of collagen in the body. Collagen is a protein, and therefore is a substance which is controlled by enzymes, and sometimes acts as an enzyme itself. Collagen recieves directions about where and how to assemble by interacting with different enzymes and molecules, all of which are coded for in the DNA...which means that they were made from DNA...which means that DNA DOES control the assembly of collagen, as well as every other protein in our bodies. This diagram was blatantly unscientific.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein
Hypothesis #2: Creationism can be Proven
This article explains how in the Q'ran, Allah says that he created everything from water. Therefore, because all living things are created from water, they should and do display water-like characteristics. For example, water molecules are held together by weak hydrogen bonds in a sort of hexagonal pattern, and likewise the honeycomb beehives is arranged in a hexagonal pattern, and the bees attach themselves too it with hydrogen bonds....wait, that last part might not be right...
In addition, water ripples when a rock hits its surface, and likewise earthquakes act with a rippling motion.
I don't think I need to go too far into all of this as to why it is bunk. First of all, just because two things look alike, doesn't mean they are alike. Water molecules held together by hydrogen bonds and a bee's honeycomb couldn't bee more different.
To clarify my point, George Washington sure looks like this one rock I saw in Mount Rushmore, but that doesn't mean that Georgie is made of rock, or vice versa.
Everytime I look into "creationist evidence" I always do so with high hopes, and I am always dissappointed.
The first diagram attempts to prove how evolution is false because specific traits cannot be passed from mother to offspring by way of DNA, and that Natural Selection is therefore moot.
In its attempt, the diagram tells us that, for instance, although DNA is responsible for making collagen, (a molecule which acts as "scaffolding" for our bodies in many different tissues, etc.), is is not responsible for the assembly of that collagen, and therefore evolution is impossible.
In rebuttel to this claim, I would like to remind/inform everyone that DNA most certainly is responsible for the assembly, growth, and maintenance of collagen in the body. Collagen is a protein, and therefore is a substance which is controlled by enzymes, and sometimes acts as an enzyme itself. Collagen recieves directions about where and how to assemble by interacting with different enzymes and molecules, all of which are coded for in the DNA...which means that they were made from DNA...which means that DNA DOES control the assembly of collagen, as well as every other protein in our bodies. This diagram was blatantly unscientific.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protein
Hypothesis #2: Creationism can be Proven
This article explains how in the Q'ran, Allah says that he created everything from water. Therefore, because all living things are created from water, they should and do display water-like characteristics. For example, water molecules are held together by weak hydrogen bonds in a sort of hexagonal pattern, and likewise the honeycomb beehives is arranged in a hexagonal pattern, and the bees attach themselves too it with hydrogen bonds....wait, that last part might not be right...
In addition, water ripples when a rock hits its surface, and likewise earthquakes act with a rippling motion.
I don't think I need to go too far into all of this as to why it is bunk. First of all, just because two things look alike, doesn't mean they are alike. Water molecules held together by hydrogen bonds and a bee's honeycomb couldn't bee more different.
To clarify my point, George Washington sure looks like this one rock I saw in Mount Rushmore, but that doesn't mean that Georgie is made of rock, or vice versa.Everytime I look into "creationist evidence" I always do so with high hopes, and I am always dissappointed.
