Wednesday, July 19, 2006

It's the Cell, Not the DNA

Back in Darwin's day, the basic unit of biological life, the cell, was considered to just be a blob of jelly-like protoplasm. As biologist Michael Behe puts it, it was "Darwin's Black Box" (a book I'd recommend if you have interest in such things).

Just in the past twenty or thirty years has it become clear that the cell is an incredibly complicated factory, having all sorts of machines on the factory floor, with pipes running to and fro, and communication conduits, and little factory-floor robots shuttling materials around, and loading docks, and emergency repair teams and warning alarms and monitoring sensors and on and on and on.

However, it struck me this morning that the average person on the street still believes that DNA is the stuff that makes us who we are.

I wanted to take a quick minute to help update the populace.

DNA (DeoxyriboNucleic Acid) provides the programming that runs the factory equipment. It does not actually build that equipment.

So where does the equipment come from?

It comes from your mother.

Your mother provides a copy of her cells; this is the egg. She also provides half of the programming library (DNA) to run that copy of her cells. Your father provides the other half of the programming library.

You are essentially a cellular clone of of your mother, but the instructions (DNA) contained in the central library (nucleus) determine if your factory machines produce green widgets or red widgets, if they produce long eyelashes or short eyelashes, if they produce a dark-skinned person's dosage of skin-coloring melatonin or a light-skinned person's dosage of melatonin.

Kinda helps to emphasize what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 11:12:
For as woman came from man, so also man is born of woman.
This also explains how that an animal "kind" can reproduce after its kind, but still allow all sorts of "variation on a theme". (In reality, evolutionists find this "variation on a theme" all over nature, in the lab, and in the fossil record, while they only imagine "cross from one kind to another" change; yet they insist we are a product of this imaginary latter kind of change. Check out their "best examples" of evolution - "variation on a theme" is what you'll find.)

No comments: