ARGUMENT: COMMON DESIGN POINTS TO COMMON ANCESTRY ~ 111is Paramecium, where a few of the 64 codons code for different amino acids. More examples are being found constantly.1 The Discovery Institute has pointed out this clear factual error in the PBS program.2 Also, some organisms code for one or two extra amino acids beyond the main 20 types.3 The reaction by the PBS spokeswoman, Eugenie Scott, showed how the evolutionary establishment is more concerned with promoting evolution than scientific accuracy. Instead of conceding that the PBS show was wrong, she attacked the messengers, citing statements calling their (correct!) claim o bizarre as to be almost beyond belief.�Then she even implicitly conceded the truth of the claim by citing this explanation: hose exceptions, however, are known to have derived from organisms that had the standard code.�To paraphrase: t was wrong to point out that there really are exceptions, even though it true; and it was right for the PBS to imply something that wasn true because we can explain why it not always true.�But assuming the truth of Darwinism as vidence�for their explanation is begging the question. There is no experimental evidence, since we lack the DNA code of these alleged ancestors. There is also the theoretical problem that if we change the code, then the wrong proteins would be made, and the organism would die �so once a code is settled on, wee stuck with it. The Discovery Institute also demonstrated the illogic of Scott1. National Institutes of Health , August 29, 2002. 2. September 10, 2001 press release, BS Charged with alse Claim�on niversal Genetic Code,��. 3. Certain archaea and eubacteria code for 21st or 22nd amino acids, selenocysteine and pyrrolysine �see J.F. Atkins and R. Gesteland, he 22nd Amino Acid,�Science 296(5572):1409�0, May 24, 2002; commentary on technical papers on p. 1459�2 and 1462�6.
