Life, but not as we know it
Scientists change the genetic code of a bacterium to use an amino acid not usually seen in life, two new, different types of DNA base, and different tRNA.
People have wondered whether the 4 bases in DNA and the 20 amino acids are required or an accident. This points to it being an accident: other possibilities exist and can now be utilized.
And it works!
In my best sarcastic George Michael singing voice... "Time can never cause, careless DNA hypothesis of atheist scientists. Ignorance is kind. There's no comfort in the truth. Pain is all they'll find."
Is this the best atheist scientists can do? One needs 23 amino acids to form a protein. This experiment just shows that people can form a weird amino acid not usually seen in life. Amino acids are all around us and yet no right kinds of amino acids, just an artificial one or weird one, nor a protein. Even in deep space with all its amino acids, no formation of protein. It can only happen within a cell. It's simple. No cell. No protein. God created the system on the first day.
The creation of life isn't really these atheist scientists' goal. Suddenly, we're referring to Scripps "and" an unnamed biotech company. Did you get that? What these people want to do is form new amino acids to exploit for profit. And they usually end up causing havoc. Their expensive new pill will likely cause you to die early or cause biological havoc in the worst case scenario. An amino acid mutation is not good.
The safe way to deal with all this is to READ what real scientists, i.e. what creation scientists have to say.
"A
mutation is any spontaneous heritable change in
DNA sequence that contributes to
genetic variability. It results from 2 possible mechanisms.
- Cellular accidents during processes like replication, recombination, or transposition.
- Exposures to foreign mutagens, such as chemicals or ultra violet rays.
If even one of the
nucleotides in a
gene is changed to another, then a new variation of the
allele has been added to the population, and a different amino acid may be assembled into the
protein during
gene expression.
Types
Mutations are classified as harmful, beneficial, or neutral.
- Harmful - spontaneous changes to genes will render proteins dysfunctional, and can lead to physical deformation, cancer, or death.
- Beneficial - mutations that produce some benefit can theoretically happen, even though the protein loses all or some of its function.
- Neutral - mutation where there is no effect (also known as a silent mutation). A neutral mutation either results from a codon that is translated into the same amino acid during gene expression, or a changed amino acid that has no effect on protein function. The following table shows several codons that are each translated into the same amino acid. In each case, the 3rd nucleotide in the codon would be a neutral mutation if changed.
Amino Acid
Serine Leucine Proline Arginine Threonine
Codon TCT CTT CCT CGT ACT
Codon TCC CTC CCC CGT ACC
Codon TCA CTA CCA CGT ACA
Codon TCG CTG CCG CGT ACG
New information
It is clear that new
gene alleles are accumulating in populations today, but there are two possible sources for these changes; mutations, and intentional changes introduced by
genetic recombination. The
theory of evolution attributes the continued production of genetic diversity to mutations, but
evolutionists overlook the fact that the
cell was
intelligently designed. The cellular machinery was programmed to perform a level of self genetic engineering, and is editing genes systematically so that organisms can
adapt to a wide variety of environmental conditions.
[1]
Evolutionists contend that mutation, acted upon by
natural selection is the mechanism for evolutionary advancement. While this mechanism has the power to change the genome over time, most biological evolution is actually due to genetic recombination followed by natural selection. There are many examples put forward by evolutionary biologists that attempt to show how new genes have been introduced into the genome of an
organism. However, in most documented cases it merely illustrates the built-in plasticity or variation within the original
created kind. Merely shuffling of already existing genes becomes woefully inadequate if the observational science is followed.
Despite the few examples of beneficial genetic mutations it is unrealistic to assume that this information produced through changing already existing DNA would then be acted on again many more times by other related mutations to build radically different and complex structures than what was there previously. This is to say that mutations are not a reasonable means of producing cascading morphological change from one kind of animal to another but merely speciation.
Obviously mutations can indeed cause dramatic phenotype change from environmental pressures. Many experiments have been performed on fruit flies (Drosophila) where poisons and radiation induced mutations. However, the problem is that they are always deleterious. The Drosophila experiments showed an extra pair of wings on a fly, but these were a hindrance to flying because there are no accompanying muscles. Therefore, these flies would be eliminated by natural selection. Even in the case of mutations which can change the amount of DNA possessed by an organism, an increase in the amount of DNA does not result in increased function. Biophysicist Dr.
Lee Spetner in his book,
Not by Chance: Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution, analyzed examples of mutational changes that evolutionists claimed were increases in information, and demonstrated that they were actually examples of loss of specificity, meaning loss of information.
“ In all the reading I've done in the life-sciences literature, I've never found a mutation that added information. … All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it." - Spetner ”
and
“ We see then that the mutation reduces the specificity of the ribosome protein and that means a loss of genetic information. ... Rather than saying the bacterium gained
resistance to the antibiotic, it is more correct to say that is lost sensitivity to it. ... All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it. ”
[2]
Georgia Purdom from AiG, Ph.D. of molecular genetics, has stated,
“ Mutations only alter current genetic information; they have never,
ever been observed to add genetic information; they can only change what is there. I have a lot of papers come across my desk of supposedly mutations that have added genetic information, and I've read them all, and I've looked at them all, and never,
once have I seen one that has added genetic information; they just don't do that."