Creation vs Evolution (Part 3)

Hey everyone! Here is the third part of my creation vs evolution paper, summarizing chapter 3 of Exploring Evolution. Enjoy!

The Debate About Molecular Homology

Molecular homology is the study of the similarity of molecules, particularly proteins and DNA, in living creatures. All living things have a DNA code, which forms many different sequences. Those sequences are “translated” and used to gather the pieces of the amino acid code, which are then arranged to form amino acid sequences. The amino acid sequences become proteins. The codes and sequences of DNA and amino acids are similar among all living things, and evolutionists say this points to a common ancestor. 

 

However, there are some gene sequences that are found in one kind of creature, but not in any other kind of creature. Opponents of evolution say that because these gene sequences are only in one kind of animal, there does not seem to be any possible ancestor for that kind of animal, because there is no known source for that gene sequence outside of the kind.

Scientists used to think that there was only one genetic code for all creatures. More recent studies have shown that there are actually several different genetic codes. Scientists realize that a genetic code can not change without killing off the creature, so the only reasonable conclusion is that there are multiple ancestors.

Even without considering the above facts which contradict the idea of a common ancestor, opponents of evolution point out that the DNA and amino acid molecules may be similar simply because they do similar jobs. 

 

Another claim of the evolutionists is that the differences between proteins in different kinds of animals can be used to tell how long ago they began to evolve from the common ancestor. They call this method of timing the molecular clock. The biggest problem with it is that mutations happen at different rates, so no one knows how fast mutations have been happening. Because of this, the molecular clock can not be used to obtain any accurate information. It also runs based on circular reasoning, because the evolutionists are trying to prove something, and in trying to do so, they are assuming that what they are trying to prove is true. 

 

Furthermore, evolutionists claim that family trees based on anatomical homology match the family trees based on molecular homology, which they actually do not. Sometimes, a family tree based on one protein does not match a family tree based on a different protein. Also, two different laboratories doing the exact same test on the exact same protein can come out with two different family trees.

Faced with all of this evidence against their theory, some evolutionists are starting to wonder if there are multiple ancestors instead of just one common ancestor.