Are all races of Adam and Eva?

We always wonder why different human strains are born from the same origin. Just like children with different hair colors like gold, black, brown, red are born from parents with black hair. Today, some of us carry genes that regulate the color of hair and eye color of children. But the first human parents possessed genes that regulated all human traits and races.

Genes that regulate basic traits appear throughout the entire community, but not everyone carries all the variants of those genes. For example, a person may carry several gene variants that regulate eye color (brown, green, blue) but others may carry only one gene variant that regulates eye color (eg brown). Therefore, both of these people have different abilities in determining their children's eye color.

Black-haired parents can give birth to blond hair, but their blonde children (because of their full recessive genes) will not be able to give birth to black hair unless they marry a dark-haired person. If the descendants were blond and only got blond hair, the whole grandchildren would only have blond hair after the original ancestors had black hair.

Micro evolution is dominant

In fact there is only one race - that is, humans - there are countless variations and permutations.

Scientific evidence shows that in nature there is only microscopic evolution (also called horizontal evolution - evolution in the same 'biological' form (such as breeds of dogs, cats, horses, dairy cows .). not macro evolution (vertical evolution - evolution between biological forms, especially from simple forms to more complex forms).

Today we have dogs that a few hundred years ago have not yet appeared. This is another example of micro evolution in nature. No matter how many breeds a dog is born, it is still a species, not a different species. Even the creation of a new animal or plant thanks to the breed does not follow Darwin's evolutionary theory because breeding does not produce new genetic products but simply a combination of available genes.

Mutants and nature

New changes or combinations of genes are available that regulate available traits that have occurred in nature but have no new gene formation or properties. This is even true for gene mutations. For example, mutations that occur in genes that define the characteristics of human hair give rise to a new type of hair. But that mutation cannot change this gene to form completely new feathers, wings or features. Mutations can effectively double the properties (fingers, toes or even a body part). However, these phenomena are not considered new features.

Proponents of evolutionary theory believe that if there is enough time, random mutations in the genome are caused by the random effects of the environment, such as radiation, that will form a completely new gene. Completely new features that naturally select can impact or preserve.

However, there is no scientific evidence yet that random mutations can give rise to new genes programmed for new traits in species. Wanting to do that requires genetic engineering. While random gene mutations occur due to environmental effects are not eligible to be called genetic engineering.

Mutations are unexpected changes in the molecular structure sequence in genetic code. Mutations are often harmful. But we still know that some earthquakes are not harmful to homes, so are gene mutations, not all mutations are biologically harmful. However, if a beneficial mutation occurs, there are hundreds of harmful mutations and its consequences over time become a catastrophic thing for the species.

Moreover, only mutations that occur in genital cells such as sperm or eggs are transmitted to children. Mutations or any changes that occur in other cells of the body are not genetic. For example, if a woman loses a finger, it does not mean that the woman's child was born without a finger. Similarly, if a monkey has learned to go straight, that characteristic cannot be inherited to its offspring.

Can this species' DNA be converted into DNA of another species?

Most biological variants in the same species (human, dog, cat, horse, mouse .) are the result of a new combination of available genes rather than mutations.

What we call genes are actually segments of the DNA molecule. DNA or genetic code has a molecular fiber structure consisting of different nucleic acids arranged in a certain sequence. It is the sequence of nucleic acids on the DNA molecule that provides information for the cells in our bodies to produce proteins, form tissues, and organs such as the nose, eyes, brain . If nucleic acids lying on the coding gene that does not follow the sequence, the gene will function incorrectly Even produced harmful proteins cause serious health-related problems, even death.

There is no scientific rule that captures nucleic acids to go together in a certain order. They are easy to bond with. The reason we find nucleic acids in order is that they are already regulated by genes. In the process of new cell formation in the body, the genes of old cells have regulated the genes of new cells.

According to evolutionary advocates, they believe that over millions of years, radiation and other environmental impacts will be able to accumulate enough random mutations in the genetic structure sequence. of a certain species. From here, completely new genes with new structures are created and new information is provided for biological, organ and structural characteristics.

Can we believe that when we change the letters in a cookbook, will we have an astronomy book? Of course not. And if the cookbook is a living entity, it will die in the process of that transformation.

Transforming this book into another book, or transforming this species' DNA into the DNA of the other species is more complex than impossible. A smart plan and a sketch are needed to transform a book or transform a DNA of a simple species into DNA of a complex species.

Biological and chemical materials to create new genes exist in all species, but the problem is that the random effects of nature (such as radiation) are not able to rearrange those materials into a new gene regulates new properties. Once again, asserting mutations can only create variations of inherent properties. To turn a fish into a human requires sophisticated manipulation of the gene. And the random impact of the environment cannot create such a miracle.

There are still many unexplored mysteries

If the environment cannot carry out genetic engineering and if macro evolution does not exist, then we will explain how biologically and genetically similarities exist between different species or between all forms. living. Although no scientific information is available, soul creationists believe that the only explanation for the biological and genetic connection between all creators lives. It is the person who establishes the same functions for all life forms from the simplest to the most complex. Even humans apply this ' general design ' rule in building buildings.

Many people still confuse natural selection and evolution. Charles Darwin also pointed out that natural selection must inevitably occur in nature. But many people do not understand that natural selection itself cannot produce biological characteristics or variations.

It can only give ' choice ' from the source of biological variation that has been created and only exist. The main problem here is which biological variations are created and which variants can exist. When there is a biological variation occurring in a species and this variation (such as skin color changes .) that helps the species survive in the environment, that variation will be preserved (' option ' ) and passed on to the next generation. This event is called ' natural selection ' or ' survival for the right person '. But even so, ' natural selection ' or ' survival for the right person ' cannot create biological properties and variations.

The term ' natural selection ' is simply a rhetorical form. Nature cannot make active, conscious choices. It is absolutely a passive process. Darwin did not recognize the origin of the biological variant. He simply assumed that any biological change could exist. However, we now know the biological characteristics and variant types encoded in genes.

Natural selection must combine with evolution, not just evolution. Since natural selection can only ' select ' from adaptable biological variants, this raises the question of what kind of biological variant can exist? How many biological variations are there in nature? We all know that evolution is limited to plants and animals.

Another reason why macroscopic evolution cannot happen in nature is because the redundant or newly evolved organ has to take millions of years to complete because random mutations can still become one. ' worth it '. How can a species survive over millions of years while its essential organism is in the process of evolution?

For example, how can animals breathe, eat and reproduce if their respiratory, digestive and reproductive organs are still incomplete and evolving? How can species cope with harmful bacteria if the immune system has not fully evolved?

Scientist and creative doctrine, Dr. Walt Brown, was right to say in his book 'In The Beginning': ' All species have perfected evolution, not new. only partially evolved. They have a specific appearance. There are no examples of feathers, eyes, skin, tubular organs (arteries, veins, intestines .) or any of the thousands of vital organs for resurrection that are in the process of development. . If any part is not 100% complete, it becomes 'debt'. For example, if a reptile's leg evolved into a bird's wing, it would be considered a broken leg rather than a perfect wing . '

Often when it comes to ' biological form ', it refers to natural species, but it is not always true. The problem is that to evolve in nature from one biological ' form ' into another 'biological' form , a whole new genome needs to be formed but not simply a transformation or a combination. inherent genes. For example, if the offspring are born unable to cross with the original parents, then the species will be formed. But without a new gene or characteristic, there cannot be macro evolution, and those two distinct species are still considered the same ' form '.

Science cannot prove that we exist because of creation, but science cannot prove either by chance or by the macroscopic evolution that we appear. Both views are based on trust. But which, Darwin's macroscopic theory or creation will be supported by science?

If any of our astronauts found similar figures, there are four faces carved on Mt. Rushmore in a desolate planet, it is certain that the carved faces on that mountain cannot be formed by creation or by accident by accident. Science itself does not agree with both ideas. But some people will support either one side or the other.

What we believe in the source of life influences our philosophy, value of life as well as the view of ourselves and others. That shouldn't be a small problem.

Science can explain the nature of life and the universe does not mean that there exists a boundary. The laws of nature can fully explain the order of life, the universe, even the way the microwave works, but only with those indirect rules cannot explain the origin. of that order.