We wuz wrong! Darwinist claim about 500 million year old gene was way shoddier than we thought …
|July 13, 2012||Posted by News under Darwinism, Intelligent Design|
Jonathan Wells, author of The Myth of Junk DNA, gives us the lowdown on the recent ScienceDaily announcement, “Giving Ancient Life Another Chance to Evolve: Scientists Place 500-Million-Year-Old Gene in Modern Organism.”  (which we covered here.)
But this announcement is extremely misleading, and typical of the shameless hype that so often accompanies breaking news in evolutionary biology.
The so-called “500-million-year-old gene” is an artificially engineered DNA sequence based on an inference from a hypothetical phylogenetic tree about what the ancestral sequence might have been. The procedure was this: Two groups of evolutionary biologists constructed hypothetical phylogenetic trees of bacteria, based on similarities and differences in their DNA [2,3].
A third group inferred from these hypothetical trees the DNA sequence of what they believed to be the ancestral version of a particular gene , and the group featured by Science Daily “resurrected” the hypothetical ancestral gene by synthesizing its inferred DNA sequence in the laboratory.
The artificial gene was not 500 million years old. In fact, its inferred DNA sequence, like the phylogenetic trees on which the inference was based, depended heavily on the neo-Darwinian assumptions with which the researchers began. Like so much other arguments for Darwinian evolution, this began by assuming evolution is true.
 “Giving Ancient Life Another Chance to Evolve: Scientists Place
500-Million-Year-Old Gene in Modern Organism,” Science Daily (July 11,
 Battistuzzi FU, Feijao A & Hedges SB, “A genomic timescale of prokaryote
evolution: insights into the origin of methanogenesis, phototrophy, and the colonization of land. BMC Evolutionary Biology 4 (2004): 44. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2148/4/44
 Ciccarelli FD, Doerks T, von Mering C, Creevey CJ, Snel B & Bork P, “Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of Life,” Science 311 (2006): 12831287.
 Gaucher EA, Govindarajan S & Ganesh OK, ³Palaeotemperature trend for Precambrian life inferred from resurrected proteins,² Nature 451 (2008): 704-707.
Does anyone know what Darwinists would do if it occurred to them that Darwinism is nonsense?
Follow UD News at Twitter!