On Fri, 29 Dec 95 13:45:35 MST you wrote:
SJ>Agreed. Gish points out:
>"A creationist would also expect many biochemical similarities in all
>living organisms. We all drink the same water, breathe the same air,
>and eat the same food. Supposing, on the other hand, God had made
>plants with a certain type of amino acids, sugars, purines,
>pyrimidines, etc.; then made animals with a different type of amino
>acids, sugars, purines, pyrimidines, etc.; and, finally, made man with
>a third type of amino acids, sugars, etc. What could we eat? We
>couldn't eat plants; we couldn't eat animals; all we could eat would
>be each other! Obviously, that wouldn't work. All of the key
>molecules in plants, animals, and man had to be the same. The
>metabolism of plants, animals, and man, based on the same biochemical
>principles, had to be similar, and therefore key metabolic pathways
>would employ similar macromolecules, modified to fit the particular
>internal environment of the organism or cell in which it must
>function." (Gish D.T., "Creation Scientists Answer Their Critics",
>1993, Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, p277)
JF>I find this unconvincing. Is it necessary that our food use the
>same molecules as we do? I thought the most important thing was that
>it contain energy tied up in chemical bonds.
Dennis Durst's original point was:
DD>...that the genetic interconnectedness of all living things, the
common denominator of DNA, does not necessarily favor TE over PC.
After all, the biotic food chain requires such a common denominator,
otherwise one kind of creature would be incapable of ingesting
another. It seems to me like the brilliant scheme of an intelligent
designer; whether or not He "tinkered" or "intervened" after the
initial creation....
Gish (a biochemist) confirmed that in order for animals to eat, "All
of the key molecules in plants, animals, and man had to be the same.
The metabolism of plants, animals, and man, based on the same
biochemical principles, had to be similar, and therefore key
metabolic pathways would employ similar macromolecules."
I think therefore that Gish had already answered your question. It
is indeed "necessary that our food use the same molecules as we do".
JF>Gish mentions sugars above. Are they found in animals as well as
>plants? If not, Gish has falsified his own claim, since we manage to
>digest them just fine.
Indeed, sugars are a universal, an essential component of cells
and are therefore found in "animals as well as plants".
Happy New Year!
Stephen
----------------------------------------------------------------
| Stephen Jones ,--_|\ sjones@iinet.net.au |
| 3 Hawker Ave / Oz \ http://www.iinet.net.au/~sjones/ |
| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ phone +61 9 448 7439. (These are |
| Perth, Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
----------------------------------------------------------------