".....consider how some tiny creatures fully depend upon each other for survival in a relationship called symbiosis. This very clearly showcases divine creation. How could two unrelated creatures have this relationship unless they were intentionally crafted that way from the beginning? Otherwise, they would die while waiting for a perfect partner to evolve.
A leaf-green creature called the pea aphid feeds on the plant sap it extracts from leaf veins, but the sap lacks some required amino acids. Bacteria living inside the aphid's body manufacture and export the vital nutrients to their aphid host. The aphid and the bacteria actually swap these nutrients in a regulated and coordinated assembly-and-shipping system that rapidly responds to supply and demand.
What if either creature manufactured or exported too many, too few, or the wrong kinds of amino acids?
Researchers found the machine that regulates the amino acids—but it was in an unexpected place. An active protein gate called a transporter shuttles amino acids between aphids and bacteria.
The Miami University press release said, "The findings of these studies show that symbiotic relationships have the power to shape animal evolution at the genetic level." Wait a second. Do any of their observations really show that "the power" to shape genetics came from "symbiotic relationships" instead of from the Lord?
Evolutionary speculation—not observations—suggest that long ago, before these creatures' lives merged into a symbiotic dance, they were making extra gene copies, including copies of transporter genes, for no functional purpose. Wilson said, "Given the extensive gene duplication of the amino acid transporter gene families that took place multiple times independently in sap-feeding insects, it makes sense that gene duplication might be important for recruiting amino acid transporters."
does the gene duplication story really make as much sense as Wilson suggests? It doesn't explain how the aphids would have survived before its symbionts were supplying vital amino acids. And how can any unthinking natural process help with "recruiting amino acid transporters?" Only intelligent recruiters are known to recruit.
How would those ancient imaginary pea aphid ancestors have made any transporter protein back when it didn't have its bacteria, and thus didn't have the very amino acids out of which those transporters are built? The evolutionary scenario seems essentially impossible." ICR
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.
Genesis 1:31
3 Types of Symbiosis:
A leaf-green creature called the pea aphid feeds on the plant sap it extracts from leaf veins, but the sap lacks some required amino acids. Bacteria living inside the aphid's body manufacture and export the vital nutrients to their aphid host. The aphid and the bacteria actually swap these nutrients in a regulated and coordinated assembly-and-shipping system that rapidly responds to supply and demand.
What if either creature manufactured or exported too many, too few, or the wrong kinds of amino acids?
Researchers found the machine that regulates the amino acids—but it was in an unexpected place. An active protein gate called a transporter shuttles amino acids between aphids and bacteria.
The Miami University press release said, "The findings of these studies show that symbiotic relationships have the power to shape animal evolution at the genetic level." Wait a second. Do any of their observations really show that "the power" to shape genetics came from "symbiotic relationships" instead of from the Lord?
Evolutionary speculation—not observations—suggest that long ago, before these creatures' lives merged into a symbiotic dance, they were making extra gene copies, including copies of transporter genes, for no functional purpose. Wilson said, "Given the extensive gene duplication of the amino acid transporter gene families that took place multiple times independently in sap-feeding insects, it makes sense that gene duplication might be important for recruiting amino acid transporters."
does the gene duplication story really make as much sense as Wilson suggests? It doesn't explain how the aphids would have survived before its symbionts were supplying vital amino acids. And how can any unthinking natural process help with "recruiting amino acid transporters?" Only intelligent recruiters are known to recruit.
How would those ancient imaginary pea aphid ancestors have made any transporter protein back when it didn't have its bacteria, and thus didn't have the very amino acids out of which those transporters are built? The evolutionary scenario seems essentially impossible." ICR
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good.
Genesis 1:31
 |
| A remarkable mutualism between an ant, a butterfly caterpillar, and an acacia. The caterpillars have nectar organs the ants drink from, and the ants allow the caterpillars to eat acacia leaves. The ants provide protection for both plant and caterpillar. |
- Commensalism
One benefits, one (host) is not obviously affected either positively or negatively - Mutualism
Both benefit from the association - Parasitism
One benefits, the other (host) is (potentially) harmed