(HOW QURAN EXPLAINED IT)
Some outstanding scientists have attempted to resolve the riddle of the preparation of organic compounds prior to the beginning of life on earth. The essence of the problem was that all organic compounds were a product of the living. How could they have been prepared in sea or dry land while, during that period, only inorganic compounds were known to have existed? There were no advanced chemical laboratories which could synthesize organic compounds from the inorganic, like we find today in the modern pharmaceutical industry. Great pioneer work has already been carried out by Bernal, Haldane, Dickerson, Miller, Urey, Cairns-Smith, Oparin and many others. It is a great tribute to their genius that they have attempted to rebuild this amazing story of how organic compounds could have been synthesized from the inorganic without controlled laboratory conditions.
Following is the amazing story of their success and failure. This failure they themselves confess, but this confession is another tribute to their greatness. The scientific exploration revolves around the preparation of organic material for life. They mostly remain confined to prove a watery beginning. In this much they agree with the Quran. But the Quran additionally mentions a separate earlier beginning on dry land.
The crux of the matter is simply this, that although organic chemicals could have been synthesized in a watery solution of prehistoric oceans, they must have reverted to their original elementary form by the influence of hydrolysis. It was a challenge to propose how this threat could be avoided and a more advanced organic material could be prepared which would not revert to its elementary form. This means that as long as this preliminary organic material remained in water, the transfer of a hydrogen atom to the newly born chemicals would have broken them into their earlier, simpler forms perpetually. This must have resulted in a vicious circle by which no sooner was the organic material gained than it was lost. For the benefit of such readers as would demand a more scientific description of this account, we venture to present the following:
All the amino acids needed by the bricks of life are formed from aldehydes by a well known mechanism known as the Strecker Synthesis. The Strecker Synthesis of amino acids is a two-step sequence. The first step is the reaction of an aldehyde with a mixture of ammonia and HCN to yield an aminonitrile. Further hydrolysis of the aminonitrile results in the amino acid.
But the problem is that the two steps involved in the Strecker Synthesis are reversible. How the evolution of these unstable elementary compounds could become possible, is the major challenge which scientists confront. Various solutions have been proposed but they raise many more questions than they answer.
There is a growing consensus among the scientific community that somehow a dry stage has to be envisioned, whereby the elementary unstable organic chemicals in the primordial soup could be given a chance to develop into more advanced irreversible organic compounds. Moreover the formation of proteins and nucleic acids from the elementary amino acids, inevitably requires the elimination of a molecule of water from every couple of amino acid molecules and nucleotides. This is called polymerisation. But the problem is that despite the fact that it occurred in sea water, the presence of water should certainly have reversed this reaction. Hence all this polymerisation would be depolymerised.
It means that in the primitive solution each molecule had to be dehydrated within water, an extremely complicated and difficult, if not impossible, task. Most condensation reactions in the laboratory invariably give better results when the mixture is allowed to dry. This suggests that the evaporation of primitive solutions must have taken place after it was splashed on rocks, mud and beaches. This may well have been an essential stage between the rudimentary compounds created in water and the more highly evolved ones which would no longer remain reversible to their elementary forms.
OF ALL THE THEORIES tackling this problem, the most interesting and probable are those which present the scenario of surface catalysts, like silica and clay, to have played their part in this process. This was first pointed out by John Bernal in 1951. He writes in his book The Physical Basis of Life:
'...the adsorption of clays, muds and inorganic crystals are powerful means to concentrate and polymerize organic molecules...' 1
The idea has not lost its appeal ever since.
'... Sidney, W. Fox showed that amino acids were capable of polymerizing fairly easily to yeild polypeptides under various conditions simulating those which may have prevailed on the primitive Earth. This polymerization may have been induced by electrical discharges, by heat (geothermal energy for example) or by contact with certain types of clay and polyphosphates.' 2
Cairns-Smith took this idea even further. While Bernal had proposed that not only clay, but also silicon was necessary to help the formation of organic molecules, Cairns-Smith suggested that clays were the material, perhaps the sole material, out of which the necessary organic compounds were made. His theory was vividly summarized in the opening statement of his 1966 paper.
Some scientists however, insist that the evolution of organic material did not have a wet start, which, because of the constant threat of hydrolysis, could not carry the reactions beyond a reversible vicious circle. They insist that it is solid state chemistry we should be looking for.
Despite the differences of opinion as to how the problem of hydrolysis was finally overcome, one thing is certain that no scientific theory of chemical evolution is conceivable without proposing an initial or intermediary dry stage. This stage was reached when the oceanic pre-biotic soup was concentrated and dried in the form of laminated micro-thin layers of clay. The Quran is evidently on the side of those who support a wet beginning with an intermediary stage of dryness where concentrated primordial soup was moulded into plates like dry ringing clay, such as broken pieces of earthenware.
The research of Noam Lahav, David White and Sherwood Chang further illustrates the importance of clay as playing a pivotal role in the synthesis of organic material. They showed how clays subjected to cycles of wetting and drying can link molecules of the amino acid known as glycine. The cycling transfers energy from the environment to the organic molecule. 3
Their proposed solution was very close to the one presented by the Quran but it was Cairns-Smith who even more clearly and unreservedly supported the Quran while he was absolutely unaware of any Quranic statement on this subject.
THE relevant verses of the Quran are repeated below:
... With water did We create every living thing ... 4
He created man from dry ringing clay like pieces of pottery. 5
And, surely, We created man from dry ringing clay made from stagnant blackish mud. 6
It is worthy of note here that these verses clearly state that the material used for the making of pottery-like plates was decayed organic matter—stagnant blackish mud.
The scientists believe that upon further drying, the clay must have crystallized asymmetrically thus becoming laminated into extremely thin layers, set one upon the other, to form plates resembling pieces of pottery. It should be noted with interest that this thin lamination also serves another very important purpose—that of enlarging the area of reaction. Micas and clays comprise laminated sheets of silicate with layers of water molecules separating these sheets. They are only 0.71 nanometres apart. This increases the surface area for adsorbing molecules enormously. Hence a cube of dry clay of this formation, as small as one centimetre on each side, can provide a total surface area of around two thousand eight hundred square metres—about three-quarters of an acre.
A brief account of what scientists have been engaged in during their search for clues leading to the creation of material required for life has already been given. What happened from then on till the end of their journey is produced below with reference to Coyne's profound research on this subject.
Coyne, University of California, discussing the role of kaolinite clays in the early stages of chemical evolution, argues that they can gather energy from the environment, (by radioactive processes), store it, and then release it when the clay is suitably disturbed, by repeated wetting and drying.7
The journey of exploration is far from over. In fact, the entire research of scientists and their efforts to unravel the riddle of the origin of life are no more advanced than the very primordial organic soup, the mysteries of which they are attempting to fathom. What happened and how it happened, during the misty dawn of creation in the primordial soup of the oceans, is as yet a study at its nascent stage.
Having examined the amazing significance of dry ringing clay at the preparatory stages of biotic evolution, let us pause and wonder for a while at the dazzling brilliance of the Quranic claim made over fourteen hundred years ago. The idea of the participation of dry ringing clay in the creation of man is so bizarre and unique, and is diametrically opposed to the then prevalent popular tale of the genesis of Adam.
The plan of evolution which antecedes the creation of man is a masterpiece of creative wonders and a work of beauty which knows no parallel.
The transformation of an atmosphere devoid of free oxygen into the one comparatively rich in it, could as well be a case similar to that of the extinction of dinosaurs. But only the future will tell how far we are wrong, if the scientists are right. If they are right, then the problems which will emerge will be so enormous as to put to doubt the very existence of the new era of photosynthesis.
We must clearly visualize what may have happened at the time of transition when the age of photosynthesis had just dawned. All oxygen was found bonded to inorganic materials like carbon dioxide (CO2), water (H2O) and silicon dioxide (SiO2) according to the prevailing scientific opinion. In other words, the emergent bio-units must have manufactured oxygen themselves for their own consumption. After presenting the unrealistic manner in which this is supposed to have happened—but could not have happened, we will return to a more serious discussion on the nature of photosynthesis and that of chlorophyll, and the immense problems attendant upon the complexities of chlorophyll.
Imagine the scenario of a few pioneer biotic molecules suddenly emerging on the primitive seashore of evolution in an atmosphere totally devoid of oxygen to become the ancestors of all forms of life to come. It is an idea as beautiful as it is bizarre! There are many inherent problems and mysteries which remain unsolved. Their survival could not be possible merely because of photosynthesis. The energy converted from sunlight had to be stored and utilized by catabolism which was dependent in turn upon the availability of free oxygen, which during the said period was not available, or was extremely hard to come by. It was a period of storms and chaotic atmospheric conditions. How could the newly emergent life generate the oxygen itself and chase it to reabsorb it into its system for catabolism to work. How on earth, therefore, could our ancient ancestors begin their journey of life? The only supply of oxygen on which their survival depended had to be created by them themselves through photosynthesis. It is indeed a strange idea to visualize them springing into life and maintaining it without oxygen, as though they held their first breath till the time they were capable of producing the vitally needed oxygen—and catching it back from the air!
This means that if they were luckily ushered into life on a bright sunny morning, only then could photosynthesis start functioning, leading to steps which could produce oxygen. But that was not sufficient either. It was essential that the newly released oxygen should have remained within the easy reach of the bio-units for immediate consumption. In the most stormy and violent atmospheric conditions which then prevailed, it is most unlikely that the minute trickle of oxygen which they had just started producing, would remain hovering around them until it was consumed through respiration.
Every atom that was synthesized must have been carried away faster than it was produced on the wings of tempestuous winds. Can anyone imagine the utter dismay with which the bio-units must have watched that oxygen drift away before they could jump into the air to catch their first breath of life? But that is not all. The day must have ended at last, however bright, sunny and calm it might have been.
On the issue of prehistoric days and nights, let us turn to the Old Testament to catch a glimpse through Divine Scriptures as to what was happening in that remote period:
'And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness.
And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day'. 8
It must have been a bright day, like the one described, during which the early bio-units emerged for the first time with a fighting chance for them to survive on earth. But that day must have ended at last and, before the beginning of the second day, photosynthesis must have ceased altogether.
How could the poor bio-units completely destitute in the supply of oxygen have survived the first night of their precarious existence? Even the most competent yogis cannot hold their breath for that long. For the poor bio-units it was not the sun of light, but the sun of life which must have set!
Different scenarios are proposed indeed and natural selection is casually mentioned while no practical solution is offered. Natural selection has become a cliché for the scientists who want to escape into obscurism when confronted with the challenge of explaining how by chance complex things took place in precise sequence. Dickerson has enumerated some of the problems confronting them, which they have not as yet been able to resolve.
We present, in our own words, the five stages mentioned by Dickerson.
- The formation of the planet, with gases in the atmosphere that could serve as raw material for life is not as simple as it appears to be. The formation of gases in their right proportion throughout the early history of the planet Earth in itself comprises many problems which demand particular attention. But that is not all. In every change of atmospheric complexion and proportion of the gases, the question of the how and the why arises. For the earth's atmosphere to remain oxygen-free for around three and a half billion years, cannot be dismissed as merely accidental. Add to that the constant bombardment of the earth by powerful radioactive blasts from the cosmos and their devastating effect on early organisms, the problems contingent upon that would become clear. Unless countermeasures were taken against this threat no ancient organisms could survive on earth.
- The synthesis of biological monomers such as amino acids, sugars and organic bases took place for around five hundred million years. All that occurred during this phase was actually fraught with enormous problems.
- The polymerization of such monomers into primitive protein and nucleic acid chains in an aqueous environment is a very crucial stage in the early years of the preparation of life. This stage in itself would require generations of scientists to spend many a lifetime to fully comprehend all the intricacies involved in this seemingly simple proposition. Despite more than fifty years of exploration and in-depth research, scientists have not yet been able to settle even the elementary chicken and egg problem in relation to the evolution of proteins.
- The segregation of Haldane's soup into protobionts with a chemistry and an identity of their own during the early period of life in the making, was again a gigantic problem.
- Last but not least, is the challenge of conceiving how the development of some kind of reproductive machinery took place when the first bricks of life evolved. This was highly essential for the daughter cells to have all the chemical and metabolic capabilities of the parent cells.
Before closing this chapter, we should like to add a few more examples of how scientists are baffled by the dilemma of life as though originating by itself. There are millions of stages involved, of tiny invisible steps, through which the chemical evolution must have carved its course. It is not just the enormity of the challenge to comprehend how these chemical steps were taken in a certain direction and under what natural influences. There are also immense problems to visualize and discover the rationale of how these steps were sequenced in a well-designed and worked out chain—linking each ring with the other at the right place—the only place where it should have been linked. How easy it sounds for a scientist to declare that the age of bionts, drawing their energy from fermentation, came to an end and at that point began the new era of photosynthesis. But how difficult indeed it is to visualize and solve the problems attendant upon this transition from one age to another.
The presence of phosphorus in every living cell must also be justified in view of the fact that phosphorus is a rare element. Add to this the case of molybdenum and some other even rarer elements, essentially used in life building processes, and the dilemma is further compounded. Some scientists attempting to explain this have even been driven to believe that life must have come from the cosmos, because phosphorus and molybdenum are found in comparative abundance there. But they still cannot answer the question as to how life, having been shaped and designed in outer space, once transported to the planet Earth could continue to be uniformly fed by phosphorus and molybdenum all over the globe. How could it continue to prosper unhindered in an unfriendly climate where phosphorus and molybdenum, the two essentials, were no longer freely available?
Another intriguing problem confronting the scientists relates to two coexisting phenomena responsible for the maintenance and continuity of life. A living cell has two central talents—a capacity for metabolism and a capacity for reproduction. But the problem is that the nucleic acid cannot replicate without enzymes and enzymes cannot be made without nucleic acid. According to Watson and Crick, DNA cannot do its work, including forming more DNA, without catalytic proteins or enzymes. In short, proteins cannot form without DNA but neither can DNA form without proteins. To those pondering over the origin of life, it is another classic chicken and egg problem—which came first the proteins or the DNA?
To wriggle out of this dilemma some propose that both DNA and proteins developed separately, in parallel, until somehow they started a new phase of interdependence. A brilliant stroke of genius it seems, to some, but when examined more closely they will find neither an element of brilliance nor a trace of genius in this proposition. They shut their eyes to the question of how they could have developed and run parallel to each other while at every step their survival depended on the other.
It could not have happened merely by the chance interplay of all the necessary factors which could make this apparent impossibility possible without the supervision of experienced scientists. Such scientists needed a most advanced laboratory apparatus without which they could not have achieved any success, while the paradox quoted above is known to have happened outside any controlled conditions. Those who conducted the said experiments did so with reference to a similar paradox, which concerns self-replication of RNA without the essential presence of proteins and enzymes which it has to produce itself. But they had to admit that their success was no success indeed, in relation to the paradox which they attempted to resolve. Horgan confesses that these scientific experiments are too complicated to represent a plausible scenario for the origin of life.
'You have to get an awful lot of things right and nothing wrong' 9
is the admission of Orgel who conducted these experiments. What he and Horgan agree upon is that their success under strict laboratory conditions does not prove anything happening under open conditions which prevailed before the origin of life. J. Szostak separately conducted similar experiments successfully but again under strictly controlled laboratory conditions.
Harold P. Klein of Santa Clara University expresses his doubt in the following words:
'... it is almost impossible to imagine how it happened.' 10
We only object to the word almost. Instead he should have clearly confessed it was absolutely impossible without the existence of God.
According to Dickerson existence of mutual recognition is most essential. Mentioning many attempts to find a complimentary process between protein sequences and nucleic acid sequences he admits that none of them have been satisfactory.
Further elaborating the complexities of a coexistence of two parallel mechanisms in which each gives birth to the other, he again likens this impossible situation to the chicken-and-egg paradox. But the solution he proposes to solve this problem is absolutely untenable. He proposes that both egg and chicken should have separately developed and evolved independent of each other.
All those who hold Dickerson in high esteem for his priceless pioneering work in attempting to solve the riddle of life would certainly be astounded by this naive statement. The only concession one can give Dickerson is that he must have been dead tired after his long laborious pursuits to find a way out of this dilemma without admitting to the existence of God. But there is no way out for anyone without Him! With Him at the command of things, there is no paradox in nature. The omission of scientists to see the hand of the Supreme, All-Knowing, All-Powerful Creator behind the intricacies of creation is un-understandable without suggesting they are wilfully turning a blind eye to manifest realities. The so-called paradoxes become unreal when one admits the existence of God.
So declares the Quran:
Who has created seven heavens in stages. No incongruity can you see in the creation of the Gracious God. Then look again: Do you see any flaw? Aye, look again, and yet again, your sight will only return to you tired and fatigued. 11
We repeat that RNA molecules are understood to work as messengers for the transfer of information and instructions given by DNA to be carried across to other specific intended sites where the command is precisely delivered and responded to. When scientists endeavour to unveil the methodology adopted by nature for the performance of this task, they are not only amazed at the complexity of the exercise but also find themselves facing another paradox. A charging enzyme is required to attach a specific amino acid to a transfer RNA molecule, which must be received at the other end by an anticodon. But the problem is that the charging enzyme which triggers off this translation mechanism is itself synthesized by the very mechanism it produces—another egg and chicken paradox.
A perusal of the above would imply that DNA is the mother of RNA. The replication of RNA is encoded in the genetics of DNA yet scientists are positive that in some cases, at least, RNA proceeded DNA. Call it yet another chicken and egg problem, call it by any name, the existence of RNA prior to the existence of DNA will always remain an enigma.
We profoundly respect Dickerson for his tremendous service in the cause of science and laud him for his balanced unbiased attitude in resolving scientific problems. Yet for Dickerson to suggest this, leaves one absolutely astounded! Perhaps it was not a well-calculated conclusion of the scientist but merely a cry of an anguished soul that Dickerson possessed, frustrated by the impossibility of a situation which could only be resolved by paying homage to the existence of God.
REFERENCES
- BARBIERI, M. (1985) The Semantic Theory of Evolution. Harwood Academic Publishers: p.86
- OLOMUCKI, M. (1993) The Chemistry of Life. McGraw-Hill, Inc. France, p.55
- CARINS-SMITH, A.G. (June, 1985) The First Organisms. Scientific American: p.100
- Translation of 21:31 by the author.
- Translation of 55:15 by the author.
- Translation of 15:27 by the author.
- CARINS-SMITH, A.G. (June, 1985) The First Organisms. Scientific American: p.100
- The Holy Bible (1900) King James, Eyre and Spottiswoode Ltd., London, Genesis 1:2–5
- HORGAN, J. (February, 1991) In The Beginning. Scientific American: p.119
- HORGAN, J. (February, 1991) In The Beginning. Scientific American: p. 120
- Translation of 67:4–5 by the author
Comments
Post a Comment