Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 4: Line 4:  
== Creation science critique of the edosymbiotic hypothesis ==
 
== Creation science critique of the edosymbiotic hypothesis ==
   −
Creation Ministries International writes:
+
Citing a biology textbook Creation Ministries International writes:
 +
 
 +
Sometimes it is stated more cautiously:
    
‘In the endosymbiont theory, the ancestor of the eukaryotic cell (we will call this organism a protoeukaryote) is presumed to have been a large, anaerobic, heterotrophic prokaryote that obtained its energy by a glycolytic pathway. Unlike present-day bacteria, this organism had the ability to take up particulate matter … . '''The endosymbiont theory''' postulates that a condition arose in which a large, particularly complex, anaerobic prokaryote took up a small aerobic prokaryote into its cytoplasm and retained it in a permanent state [emphasis added].’
 
‘In the endosymbiont theory, the ancestor of the eukaryotic cell (we will call this organism a protoeukaryote) is presumed to have been a large, anaerobic, heterotrophic prokaryote that obtained its energy by a glycolytic pathway. Unlike present-day bacteria, this organism had the ability to take up particulate matter … . '''The endosymbiont theory''' postulates that a condition arose in which a large, particularly complex, anaerobic prokaryote took up a small aerobic prokaryote into its cytoplasm and retained it in a permanent state [emphasis added].’
Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,726

edits

Navigation menu