Evolution Deception in California State Biology Textbook,
Biology: Principles & Explorations, Chapter 12
Introduction
The
state of California has adopted the textbook Biology: Principles &
Explorations (2001) by George B. Johnson and Peter H. Raven, published
by Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, as its official biology textbook for high
school biology classes. Since my son was using this book in his class, I
decided to see what the book had to say about evolution and the history of
life on earth. As a result of examining this textbook, this page will reveal the bias and deception
behind the descriptions offered in Chapter 12, "History of Life on Earth."
Section 12-1
Section
12-1 begins with a question, "How Did Life Begin?" It sounds like a reasonable
question, although the text never even hints at an possibility that life did not
originate naturalistically, or even that life might have originated elsewhere in
space. As we shall see, these two alternative hypotheses are actually more
likely than the one proposed in the textbook.
The chapter begins with a description of the formation of the earth and how the earth's age is measured. In discussing the age of the earth, the example of potassium-40 dating is given, even though this method of dating is not used to determine the age of the earth. At least the authors could have described the uranium-lead isochron dating method, since it would have been a much better example.
Deception #1: Life arose over a period of 1 billion years
In stating "nonliving matter reacted chemically during the first billion
years of Earth's history" the text gives the impression that there were one
billion years for life to have arisen through naturalistic means. Although
there is evidence for the presence of water acting on certain minerals
(zircons) as early as 4.3 billion years ago,1 any organic molecules generated
during this time would have been completely destroyed by the period of
extreme meteor activity 3.9 billion years ago, known as the "late heavy
bombardment." According to Richard Kerr, writing in Science magazine:
"A few of these impactors were probably 500 kilometers in diameter--big enough to create a superheated atmosphere of vaporized rock that would in turn have vaporized the oceans for 2700 years and sterilized even the subsurface, say Sleep and Zahnle."2
So, we know that more than half of the billion years could not have contributed to the formation of biomolecules.
Deception #2: First life arose 3.5 billion years ago
Although acknowledging the existence of fossils from as early as 3.5
billion year ago, the text does not say that those fossils do not represent
the first life forms. In fact, there is chemical evidence that demonstrates
that complex bacterial life (oxygenic photosynthetic organisms) existed as early as 3.7
billion years ago.3 So, now we know that life arose really, really fast–in
the time between 3.9 and 3.7 billion years ago. Of course, this fact is
conveniently left out of the discussion.
Deception #3: Lerman’s bubble hypothesis
Although the textbook
rightly rejects Miller’s spark experiment as a
valid means of generating amino acids on the primordial Earth, it supports
an even more ridiculous hypothesis - Lerman's bubble hypothesis. According
to this model, gases from undersea volcanic vents combined in bubbles
forming organic compounds on their way to the surface. Although the
atmospheres in the bubbles would be reducing, it would not be expected that
merely bubbling gases through ocean water would produce any important
biomolecules. In fact, this model has never been tested for efficacy.
Another problem is that polymerization of the molecules necessary for cell
membrane assembly cannot occur in salt water.4
Other studies show that the early oceans were at least twice as salty then
as they are now.5
Deception #4: RNA replicator
What
they don’t tell the reader is that those chains are made from purified
chemicals, some of which cannot be formed spontaneously. In addition, the
RNA chains formed are very short (50 mer)6–not long enough to be
useful as a hereditary system. By comparison, the average protein requires
900 mer, and the smallest is ~120 mer. So, a 50 mer nucleic acid is
virtually useless. An RNA replicase was designed recently. It turned out to
be ~200 mer. This RNA replicase could add only 14 bases together at once, so
it couldn't even copy itself (which is absolutely necessary for the first
replicator).7 The text goes on to say:
Besides the problem of try to get a 50-mer RNA chain to replicate, no such RNA replicator has yet been found. According to Steven A. Benner (professor of Chemistry at the University of Florida), "Searches of quadrillions of randomly generated RNA sequences have failed to yield a spontaneous RNA replicator."2 Although an RNA replicase has now been found, it is still unable to replicate itself.7
Deception #5: Microspheres are equivalent to cell membranes
Microspheres can be formed through the assembly of chains of amino acids. Although these hollow spheres may look like cell membranes, there are vast differences. Cell membranes are very specialized structures composed of lipids and proteins. The incorporation of specific lipids and proteins, in combination with active processes performed in the cell's cytoplasm, makes these structures semi-permeable and osmotically stable. Even the simplest membrane uses extensive cellular machinery, requiring dozens of specific genes to encode its structure. The text goes on to model coacervates, formed through the addition of hydrochloric acid to solutions of gum arabic (a complex set of sugars and glycoproteins produced by the acacia tree) and gelatin (a product of animal skin collagen) - both of which would never form under prebiotic conditions. Although the resulting coacervates look like cells, they don't function like cells, since they are inherently unstable, lack the ability to provide a permeability barrier, and lack the ability to encapsulate metabolism.
Problems not even mentioned in the textbook
- Homochirality
- All biological sugars are right-handed in orientation
- All biological amino acids are left-handed in orientation
- The problem: all chemical reactions produce mixtures of right and left-handed sugars/amino acids
- Using mixtures of sugars/amino acids inhibits formation of polymers8
- Ribose
- Chemical synthesis of ribose (required for RNA) proceeds poorly and the ribose produced has a very short half-life
- Prebiotic chemistry produces additional sugars that interfere with RNA/DNA synthesis8
- 3. Nucleosides/nucleotides
- Pyrimidine nucleosides (cytosine and uracil) do not form under prebiotic conditions and only purine (adenine and guanine) nucleosides are found in carbonaceous meteorites8 (i.e., pyrimidine nucleosides don't form in outer space either).
- There wasn’t enough phosphate present to catalyze the formation of nucleotides from nucleosides.
- If there were some way to concentrate the phosphate, the combination of nucleosides with phosphate under prebiotic conditions produces not only nucleotides, but other products which interfere with RNA polymerization and replication.9
- Adenine synthesis requires unreasonably high HCN concentrations. In addition, adenine deaminates with a half-life of 80 years (at 37°C, pH 7). Therefore, adenine would never be expected to accumulate. The adenine-uracil interaction is weak and nonspecific, and, therefore, would never be expected to function in any specific recognition scheme under the chaotic conditions of a "prebiotic soup."10
- Cytosine deaminates with an estimated half-life of 340 years, so would not be expected to accumulate over time. Ultraviolet light on the early earth would quickly convert cytosine to its photohydrate and cyclobutane photodimers (which rapidly deaminate).11
- Metabolic pathways
- How metabolic pathways evolved is quite problematic. Without every step in the process, the pathway is completely useless
- According to Leslie Orgel, "There is no agreement on the extent to which metabolism could develop independently of a genetic material. In my opinion, there is no basis in known chemistry for the belief that long sequences of reactions can organize spontaneously -- and every reason to believe that they cannot. The problem of achieving sufficient specificity, whether in aqueous solution or on the surface of a mineral, is so severe that the chance of closing a cycle of reactions as complex as the reverse citric acid cycle, for example, is negligible."12
What do scientists say about the spontaneous origin of life?
- "Prebiotic chemistry would produce a wealth of biomolecules from non living precursors. But the wealth soon became overwhelming, with the 'prebiotic soups' having the chemical complexity of asphalt (useful, perhaps, for paving roads but not particularly promising as a wellspring for life)." (Steven A. Benner, professor of Chemistry at the University of Florida)2
- "There is now overwhelmingly strong evidence, both statistical and paleontological, that life could not have been started on Earth by a series of random chemical reactions.... There simply was not enough time... to get life going." Niles Eldridge (paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History).13
- "G. F. Joyce and L. E. Orgel lead us into the RNA world with a description of the difficulties in achieving the direct synthesis of nucleosides and nucleotides from prebiotic precursors and conclude that the de novo appearance of oligonucleotides on primitive Earth amounts to a 'near miracle'" Walter Keller (University of Basel, Switzerland)14
Conclusion 
The California state textbook Biology: Principles & Explorations (2001) by George B. Johnson and Peter H. Raven presents deceptive and misleading information on the possible spontaneous origin of life on earth. The textbook gives the impression that there were a billion years in which chemical reactions could have led to the origin on life. However, scientific studies show that there were at most 200 million years, and likely much less time. The textbook also promotes the Lerman's bubble hypothesis for the synthesis of biomolecules, even though it has never been tested in the lab. RNA is promoted as the first replicator, even though RNA does not spontaneously form chains long enough to produce such a replicator, and a search for replicator sequences has never revealed the existence of a spontaneous replicator. The textbook leaves out any discussion of chemistry that contradicts the hypotheses promoted, giving the impression that the spontaneous origin of life was likely, when, in reality, it is extremely unlikely. Such poor scholarship in our public school textbooks is one of the reasons why intelligent design proponents want to "teach the controversy" in our public school biology classes. If the textbooks did a better job relaying the truth, none of this political jockeying would be necessary.
Related Pages 
- Origin of Life Theories: Metabolism-first vs. Replicator-first Hypotheses
- Abiogenesis: Is the Chemical Origin of Life a Realistic Scenario?
- Problems with the Origin of Biological Membranes Under Prebiotic Conditions
- Cell Membrane-Like Organic Vesicles Formed in Conditions Mimicking Interstellar Clouds?
- Origin of life: latest theories/problems
- The Origin of Life on Planet Earth
- Book Review: Origins of Life: Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off
Related Materials 
Origins of Life:
Biblical and Evolutionary Models Face Off by Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross. Probably the single most potent
scientific argument against atheism is the problem with a naturalistic origin of
life. This very problem led me to become a deist as a biology major at USC in
the early 1970's. The problems for atheists have gotten no better since that
time. In fact, the last 30+ years of research have turned up even more problems
than those that existed when I first studied the theories. Fuz Rana (a
biochemist) and Hugh Ross (an astrophysist) have teamed up to write the
definitive up-to-date analysis of the origin of life. The book examines the
origins of life from the perspectives of chemistry, biochemistry, astronomy,
and the Bible. A biblical creation model is presented along side the
naturalistic models to help the reader decide which one fits the data
better.
Icons
of Evolution by Jonathan Wells
In this book, biologist Jonathan Wells examines recent college and high school textbooks, and shows how they distort the truth about biology, often presenting information that has been falsified by recent scientific studies. Icons refuted include the origin of life (the famous Miller experiment), embryo drawings that were faked, the famous Pepper Moth example of natural selection, which used staged/fake photographs, showing moths on tree trunks, genetically engineered fruit flies, the beak of the finch, archaeopteryx, and much more.
References 
- Watson, E. B. and T. M. Harrison. 2005. Zircon Thermometer Reveals Minimum Melting Conditions on Earliest Earth. Science 308: 841-844.
- Benner, S.A. 1999. Old views of ancient events. Science 283: 2026.
- Rosing, M.T. and R. Frei. 2004. U-Rich Archaean Sea-Floor Sediments from Greenland—Indications of >3700 Ma Oxygenic Photosynthesis. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 6907: 1-8.
- Szathmáry, E. 2000. The evolution of replicators. Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences 355: 1669-1676.
- Knauth, L.P. 2000. Life on Land in the Precambrian and
the Marine vs. Non-Marine Setting of Early Evolution. First Astrobiology
Science Conference, April 3-5, 2000, NASA Ames Research Center, 403 (Abstract
353).
Knauth, L.P. 2002. Early Oceans: Cradles of Life or Death Traps? Astrobiology Science Conference 2002, April 7-11, NASA Ames Research Center. p. 9. - 1997. MEETING BRIEFS: Primordial Soup Researchers Gather at Watering Hole. Science 277: 1034.
- Robertson, M.P. and W.G. Scott. 2007 The Structural Basis of Ribozyme-Catalyzed RNA Assembly. Science 315: 1549.
- Orgel, L. 1994. The origin of life on earth. Scientific American. 271 (4) p. 81.
- Shapiro, R. 2000. A replicator was not involved in the origin of life. IUBMB Life 49: 173-176.
- Shapiro R. 1995. The prebiotic role of adenine: a critical analysis. Orig. Life Evol. Biosph. 25: 83-98.
- Shapiro, R. 1999. Prebiotic cytosine synthesis: A critical analysis and implications for the origin of life. Proc. Natl.Acad. Sci. USA 96: 4396-4401.
- Orgel, L. 1998. The origin of life -- a review of facts and speculations. Trends in Biochemical Sciences, 23: 491-495. (pp. 494-495)
- Schroeder, G.L. 1992. Genesis And The Big Bang, NY, Bantam Books, p. 25.
- Keller, W. 1999. In the Beginning, There Was RNA. Science 285: 668-669. A review of the book, The RNA World 2nd ed. (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, 1999. 735 pp. ISBN 0-87969-561-7.
Last Modified June 12, 2007