Genetic engineering isolates genetic materials from one living thing, and transfers them into another organism. By this means, scientists are able to clone living things, develop plants resistant to disease and insects, and produce bacteria that digest industrial wastes. However, neither these biotechnological studies nor the genetic research they are based on support the theory of evolution. The main errors of those who claim otherwise can be summarized:
1) Biotechnological research proves that living things are not the result of random, unconscious events, but were intelligently created:
In all genetic studies, genes are worked on with great care. In other words, conscious intervention takes place. Scientists who manipulate genes in line with a specific purpose have learned about the functioning of the cell through many years of training. All the stages of the research are performed with enormous care, and are controlled by laboratories, using technological equipment, in specially regulated environments. Despite being an evolutionist, Professor of Biology William D. Stansfield cites an example of cell synthesis in the laboratory to show that studies of this kind cannot represent proof of evolution:
Creationists have looked forward to the day when science may actually create a "living" thing from simple chemicals. They claim, and rightly so, that even if such a man-made life form could be created, this would not prove that natural life forms were developed by a similar chemical evolutionary process. 130
2) Genetic variations provides no support for the theory of evolution:
Contrary to what is claimed in evolutionist publications, experiments resulting in genetic variation are no evidence for the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution maintains that there are mechanisms in nature that turn living things into more complex ones, by which means one species turns into another. In fact, experiments in the field of genetic engineering and biotechnology have demonstrated that it is impossible for genetic variation to give rise to any change of species. Some evolutionists ignore this, however, playing with words to make unrealistic claims that the theory of evolution has been proven in the laboratory.
3) Organisms developed using genetic engineering are no evidence for the theory of evolution:
Another error is the claim that new organisms developed through genetic engineering confirm the theory of evolution. The methods currently employed in the field of genetic engineering and biotechnology-particularly in such areas as the production of drugs or proteins such as insulin or altering the reaction speeds of various enzymes-are portrayed by evolutionists as evidence for the theory of evolution. In fact, it is impossible for these studies to constitute any such evidence.
Genetic engineering studies proceed through the development of recombinant DNA technology, which recombines various genes that already exist. That being so, evolutionists must first account for the origin of genes, the raw materials of their genetic engineering. (See Chapter X, "How Does the DNA Miracle Invalidate the Theory of Evolution?) Already facing a complete impasse on the subject of DNA's origin, evolutionists placed their hopes in research on genetic engineering. But since the theory of evolution claims that living species came into existence solely through chance mechanisms, evolutionist interpretations of genetic engineering are flawed from the outset. In their claims concerning genetic engineering, evolutionists exhibit a serious contradiction.
Attempts are made to use the fact that genes can be transferred between different organisms, or that genes can be recombined, as evidence of an evolutionary process. But as you have seen in previous sections, genes' highly complex structures are a most powerful proof that no such random process ever took place.
4) Genes show that living things share a common origin, not a common ancestor:
Another of the errors in the evolutionist propaganda regarding this research is that common genes that can be transferred between organisms prove the claim that living things are descended from a common ancestor. After describing how they are able to transfer genes between different species, Darwinist researchers then go on to claim that they can do so because the living things are descended from a common ancestor. People with a superficial knowledge of the subject are misled by the way analysis based on evolutionists' assumptions is portrayed as proof. In fact, a common origin constitutes no evidence for a common ancestor. Nor does the fact that genes can be transferred among different organisms prove that biologic structures evolved by chance, through haphazard natural events. Objectively, the common genes in different organisms may be regarded as an indication of common origin-which clearly supports the fact of creation.
5) Genetic engineering provides no support for atheist propaganda:
Commentaries regarding genetic engineering suggest that this is actually creating. Materialists who deny the existence of Allah use genetic engineering research to support their atheist propaganda and interpret recombinant studies as creation. (Allah is beyond this.)
Atheists refuse to grasp that "creation" means bringing something into being from nothing. Creation belongs to Allah alone. In their genetic engineering studies, scientists make changes in genes that have been created by Allah, or else transfer these between living things also created by Him in the first place. The genetic information used to develop new "hybrids" in these studies already exists in the living world.
For example, scientists can make a zebra fish emit light by implanting a luminous jellyfish gene into it, or to bring about the production of spider silk in goat's milk by implanting spider DNA into a goat. But even though the resulting life forms may appear to possess various new characteristics, no new genetic information has been created; all that has happened is that existing information has changed places among living species.
Even if scientists one day manage to radically restructure a living creature, this will still apply. The molecular biologist Michael Denton expresses this fact:
In the future, if genetic engineers are ever able to radically redesign living systems from proteins to whole organisms, this will only be via intelligently directed changes which will almost certainly necessitate programmed simultaneous change in many of the basic subsystems.131
In conclusion, evolutionist statements about genetic engineering are invalid. On the contrary, research in this field with its planned and controlled environments and deliberate changes, reveals that living things have been created with a perfect organization.
No comments:
Post a Comment