Here is an excerpt from a recent article pertinent to the ID
(Intermittant Dabbling) controversy.
"For more than 50 years scientists have operated under a set of
seemingly incontrovertible assumptions about genes, gene expression, and
the consequences thereof. Their mantra: One gene yields one protein;
genes beget messenger RNA, which in turn begets protein; and most
critically, the gene is deterministic in gene expression and can
therefore predict disease propensities.
Yet during the last five years, data have revealed inadequacies in this
theory. Unsettling results from the Human Genome Project (HGP) in
particular have thrown the deficiencies into sharp relief. Some genes
encode more than one protein; others don't encode proteins at all. These
findings help refine evolutionary theory by explaining an explosion of
diversity from relatively little starting material. We therefore need to
rethink our long-held beliefs:"
This is the entire article.
http://www.the-scientist.com/yr2004/may/research3_040524.html
Could it be that ID theory is wrong on both its conclusions and its
assumptions?
Dick Fischer -
Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Sat May 22 12:04:39 2004