Nylonase Not Supporting Evolution

Creationists have to deal with Darwin's Flying Monkeys© (because the Evo Sith don't want to invest in krakens), and they go on the prowl citing what they consider to be facts supporting scum-to-scoffer evolution. It is almost comical at times, because defenders of Darwin use incomplete, fraudulent, deceptive, and often outdated material. Informed creationists often correct them on their misuse of science.

Bacteria image credit: National Institutes of Health
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)

One item that seems to have fallen through the cracks is the claim that random mutations produced nylon-eating bacteria. (With Evo Sith logic, that slight modification means that universal common ancestor evolution is true, and there is no Creator. Sure, you betcha.) The entire story is outdated and incomplete, but a passel of people believe it; fake evolution news tends to get stuck in the public's craw, and they pass it around. Dr. Don Batten wrote about nylonase several years ago, and several points in his paper were vindicated. Now he has updated information for us, and it isn't good for evolutionists.

Theistic evolutionists connected with Biologos, continue to assert that random mutations have created a ‘new gene’ in bacteria that degrades nylon. This assertion comes from a misunderstanding that was popularized by atheist professor of biology William Thwaites in 1985, who claimed that the enzymatic activity arose from a frameshift mutation—thus from a randomness. This was in turn based on the speculation of a Japanese geneticist, Susumu Ohno. Such an occurrence would indeed be fortuitous. I have been following this subject, but after reading a helpful post by Ann Gauger of the Discovery Institute I realized it was time to publish an update.

To read the rest, click on "Nylon-degrading bacteria: update — Nylonase does not support microbes-to-mankind evolution".
  

Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!