#Science #Eukaryotes #Creation #Creationism #IntelligentDesign #Evolutionism #Endosymbiosis
#Christianity #Education #IrreducibleComplexity
In part 2 of “The Irreducible Nature of Eukaryotes” Salvador Cordova continues on where part 1 left off in the middle of reading the 2006 review article by Kurland, Collins, and Penny entitled:
“Genomics and the Irreducible Nature of Eukaryote Cells”.
Even though the article is somewhat dated it has some gems that are more relevant today than ever regarding the failure of phylogenetic speculations to offer a mechanistic explanation (in terms of physics, chemistry,
and probability) for the origin of signature structures of Eukaryotes such as the nucleus and other membrane-bound organelles.
The article highlights the fact that even a mitochondrion in a Eukaryote is an “honorary CSS” (Cellular Signature Structure) of a Eukaryote given that most of the mitochondrial genes are nuclear and even the mtDNA genes have only passing resemblance to corresponding bacterial genes.
The article highlights that endosymbiosis doesn’t explain the major features of the Eukaryotic cell including the organelles and Eukaryote Signature Proteins that are orthologs only in the Eukaryotic lineage.
Sal then points out that the article comes close to invoking independent origins for Eukaryotes that had little or nothing to do with the fusion of bacterial and archaeal parts and that eukaryotes’ ultimate ancestor was unique. If that is the case, doesn’t this echo the orchard model of creationists for independent origins rather than universal common ancestry?
Part 1 is here:
This article was gathered automatically by our news bot. We help YouTubers by driving traffic to them for free. The featured image in this article is the thumbnail of the embedded video.
