Once thought of as these simple life forms that was linked to the earliest life forms which supposedly evolved into more complex animals that excited researchers who wanted to reveal the origins of life but as the years went by scientists have been uncovering astounding amount of complex features with these one-cell animals.
New “bacterial complexity” has been recently discovered! Once thought of to be a rarity or an exception to the rule but this process found not only in more complex animals like the eukaryotes but it’s common in bacteria as well!
Science Daily calls this discovery a dawning of a new age in bacteria research…
“Protein acetylation is a molecular reaction inside the cell. It modifies and thus affects the function of proteins, including the molecular machinery responsible for turning genes on or off. Bacteria make up one of the three domains of life. The other two domains are archaea (single-cell organisms distinct from bacteria) and eukaryotes (which include plants and animals). Bacteria evolved before eukaryotes, but they are not as primitive as once thought.
“Bacteria have long been considered simple relatives of eukaryotes,” Wolfe and colleagues wrote. “Obviously, this misperception must be modified.” For example, protein acetylation historically had been considered mostly a eukaryotic phenomenon. But recent research indicates that acetylation also has a broad impact on bacterial physiology.”
“There is a whole process going on that we have been blind to,” Wolfe said.”
Patrick Forterre and Simonetta Gribaldo of the Pasteur Institute was quoted in PNAS as saying, “we should definitely stop thinking of bacteria in terms of simple ‘lower’ organisms.” So what does this new modification consist of that explains “simple” prokaryotes and their supposedly more-evolved superiors, the eukaryotes?
“For example, they imply a specific association between a bacterium and an archaeon for which there are no examples in nature, and assume a very unlikely process where all of the genes of the bacterial host coding for informational proteins would have been replaced by those of the archaeal symbiont.”
Here is a classic case of storytelling, they make this assumption that evolution is true, observe a fact, then with no examples in nature force the data into the framework by inventing a story on how it evolved which becomes irrelevant in the future with new discoveries. When one makes predictions blindly (especially complex ones) in the dark about nature, it eventually ends up falsified. It’s a disservice to the public who gives their hard earned money in terms of billions of dollars for research. Now learning how things work is good science and this is what the focus should be on rather than science fiction stories. I love reading the latest discoveries which verifies God’s Word!