Author Archive
I remember one beautiful summer day when our family decided to hike in a local wetland (marsh). As they scampered along, the children were very taken by yellow snapdragon-like flowers projecting above the water surface. Was this somebody’s idea of a joke? Who planted garden flowers under water? This plant however is anything but humorous. Its purpose is to trap and digest small aquatic organisms like water fleas, mosquito wrigglers, tiny worms or anything that is the right size and moves.
Read the rest of this entry »
DVD / $12.00 / 48 Minutes
Fractals are amazingly beautiful images built up by patterns which repeat themselves at larger and larger scales. Plotted from some obscure mathematical equations, these patterns reflect the infinitely complex and inexpressibly powerful mind of the Creator. If you like mathematics or just plain beauty, you will love this DVD!
Order Online
Paperback / $35.00 / 216 Pages / Full colour
This us an exceptionally interesting and beautiful book. Anyone who enjoys interesting new ideas, beautiful patterns and mathematics, will certainly want a copy of this book. You will be surprised how commonly fractals can be found in nature. Another testimony to the wonders of Creation!
Paperback / $12.00 / 295 Pages
Packed with information concerning the situation at most universities and colleges, the author provides Biblical strategies for maintaining a Christian world view in these institutions along with practical tips to handle faith-challenging messages. This new book provides insights from the author’s recent graduation from a secular Canadian university. First hand advice is always the best!
Order Online
HeadStart is a completely new tool available for high school students and their teachers (and postsecondary students). Written and developed by the Creation Science Association of Alberta, this tool is free and easily accessed. Check it out at www.create.ab.ca/headstart
Many people recognize that it is a privilege to learn about God, the Creator and his Creation. That is why, besides observing the natural environment in which we find ourselves, it is a pleasure to go beyond mere observations to discover how things work and why. Most young people undertake to study some science, at least at the high school level. But there is a problem, most programs of study include a lot of evolutionary concepts that point away from God and his work. Even seemingly innocent terms like microevolution, convergence, nucleus, fossil record and plant biology are loaded with evolutionary concepts. However, these phenomena themselves actually point overwhelmingly to the work of God, the Creator as described in Genesis and throughout the Bible. It was to communicate this message, that HeadStart was developed.
Read the rest of this entry »
Owls, although birds, are unique compared to other airborne avians. Called the greatest hunters, they are one of the rare bird species that regularly hunt at night.[i] They also have eyes that face forward rather than being located on the sides of their head like most other birds. Also, unlike most other birds, when not flying, owls sit straight up supported by their two legs. Many of the bones that are separated in mammals are fused together in owls, making them strong enough to support their weight when on the ground. They also have large, broad heads surrounded by a collection of feathers around the eyes. Called a “facial disc”, it functions like a satellite dish to amplify sound.[ii] The facial disc is their distinctive trait, possessed by all owls but by no other bird. Also, in contrast to most birds, they do quite well in very diverse habitats, from deserts to forests and even in locations near the arctic, where they are appropriately named snowy owls.[iii] They are also critically important in keeping the rodent population, especially rats, under control.[iv]
Read the rest of this entry »
Consider the lilies of the field. They toil not neither do they spin. Yet even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
No doubt everyone has stories of times when they saw beautiful plants or animals which quite took their breath away. Flowers are particularly good examples of this phenomenon. In the prairies of Saskatchewan and by roadsides there in June, the beautiful Western Red Lily (Lilium philadelphicum) is guaranteed to claim your attention. No wonder it is the provincial flower of that prairie province in Canada.
Read the rest of this entry »
Most Canadians are rightly proud of the beaver, their iconic national emblem. Indeed, the beaver is a remarkable animal with exceptional talents! Its lifestyle is made possible not only through the wonderful design of its body, but also through in-built skills. The fact is that beavers are the only animals anywhere which can change the landscape to suit their own needs and desires.
Read the rest of this entry »FEATURED BOOKS AND DVDS
Paperback / $22.00 / 138 Pages / full colour
Theories about the evolution of photosynthesis are constrained by two evolutionary assumptions. Firstly, scientists assume that the early earth lacked free oxygen as this would make the chemistry for origin of life scenarios easier to achieve. Also, since any new organisms would very soon need a source of food (i.e. organic carbon), scientists suggest hopefully that photosynthesis originated early in the history of life (before many cells could starve.) But how long would it take for these elaborate molecular systems to develop?
One expert defined photosynthesis and its significance as “the only significant solar energy storage process of Earth and [it] is the source of all of our food and most of our energy resources.” [Robert E. Blankenship. 2010. Early Evolution of Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. October 154(2): 434-438 See p. 434]. Obviously, the importance of this process cannot be overstated since life could not last long without a source of food.
When specialists compare organisms which exhibit the capacity for photosynthesis, they find a hodge-podge of variations rather than clear lines of descent with modification. Dr. Blankenship therefore suggests that different component parts of the process evolved separately [p. 3] and that what we see in organisms today is the result of extensive shuffling of component parts between bacteria via HGT (horizontal gene transfer) (this is the perennial evolutionary cop-out these days). [p. 2] That is why no pattern in various traits can be discerned. Six different phyla of bacteria (including cyanobacteria or blue green algae) exhibit photosynthetic abilities. Among eukaryotes, various kinds of algae and land plants are all able to photosynthesize. We see therefore that no evolutionary pattern can be seen for the origin of photosynthesis, so the experts are forced to assume that parts of the system exhibited separate origins.
The core of the photosynthetic hardware is the reaction centre. It is a multiprotein complex (maybe ~ 25-30 subunits) surrounded by an antenna of hundreds of chlorophyll molecules. All aerobic photosynthesizers have chlorophyll a. Green algae and land plants also have chlorophyll b. Depending upon the kind of alga, various other accessory pigments can be found in the antenna. Anaerobic but photosynthetic bacteria exhibit other types of the chlorophyll molecule.
Chlorophyll molecules are enigmas. They require 17 or more metabolic steps to complete the synthesis. What could possibly encourage this chemical synthesis to proceed when there was no particular use for the intermediate products? How could the process develop before there was even a use for chlorophyll? The early steps in the formation are identical to heme, a compound important in releasing energy from food. Although presumably the early syntheses of chlorophyll were initially all carried out under anaerobic conditions, now however for the cyanobacteria and eukaryotes, several steps in the synthesis require oxygen. Scientists therefore assume that some genes in the process were replaced by substitutes. The overall pathway, they suggest, remained unchanged while several component genes became completely different than in earlier versions.
The reaction centre and associated antenna are called a photosystem. Depending upon the molecules in the reaction centre, we find photosystem II in purple bacteria, type I in green sulphur bacteria and photosystems II and I in all oxygenic photosynthesis including cyanobacteria and algae and land plants. The reaction centres are so complex that scientists speculate that the core complex developed only once and subsequently underwent major changes. The basic three-dimensional protein structure with associated molecules stayed the same, but the amino acid composition (and DNA sequences) of the molecules changed. [This is a popular evolutionary theory these days, that a protein shape stayed the same while its underlying chemical composition changed entirely. But if the biochemistry is different, how can they say that the molecules are similar, no matter what the outward appearance may suggest. What this situation suggests is the use of a common blueprint.]
The accessory pigments in various photosynthesizing organisms are quite different from each other. The experts conclude that new pigments originated multiple times. [But developing a pigment from scratch that will react to the correct wavelength of light, is no mean trick.] The experts still conclude that the reaction centre/ photosystems only originated once and then underwent complex development. Nobody however has any plausible idea as to how the cyanobacteria (blue green algae) and all eukaryotic photosynthesizers came to require two photosystems. The specialists also have no idea how oxygen came to be a byproduct from capturing light energy.
It is evident that evolutionary speculations cannot explain how such elaborate cellular machinery was ever assembled, nor how the components came together, nor how they work, nor how the whole system appeared spontaneously at a time of low to zero food/energy resources. The more we learn about photosynthesis, the more elaborate we find the process to be. Evolutionary explanations are obviously completely inadequate. God’s plan was perfect. He created plants (the primary producers) ahead of the animal consumers. There never was a time when God did not provide for His creatures. Nothing, not even photosynthesis is too hard for our God to create!
Related Resources
Why “carbon dioxide + water → glucose + oxygen” is the most important equation in biology
Order Online
Paperback / $6.00 / 95 Pages / colour
Theories about the evolution of photosynthesis are constrained by two evolutionary assumptions. Firstly, scientists assume that the early earth lacked free oxygen as this would make the chemistry for origin of life scenarios easier to achieve. Also, since any new organisms would very soon need a source of food (i.e. organic carbon), scientists suggest hopefully that photosynthesis originated early in the history of life (before many cells could starve.) But how long would it take for these elaborate molecular systems to develop?
One expert defined photosynthesis and its significance as “the only significant solar energy storage process of Earth and [it] is the source of all of our food and most of our energy resources.” [Robert E. Blankenship. 2010. Early Evolution of Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. October 154(2): 434-438 See p. 434]. Obviously, the importance of this process cannot be overstated since life could not last long without a source of food.
When specialists compare organisms which exhibit the capacity for photosynthesis, they find a hodge-podge of variations rather than clear lines of descent with modification. Dr. Blankenship therefore suggests that different component parts of the process evolved separately [p. 3] and that what we see in organisms today is the result of extensive shuffling of component parts between bacteria via HGT (horizontal gene transfer) (this is the perennial evolutionary cop-out these days). [p. 2] That is why no pattern in various traits can be discerned. Six different phyla of bacteria (including cyanobacteria or blue green algae) exhibit photosynthetic abilities. Among eukaryotes, various kinds of algae and land plants are all able to photosynthesize. We see therefore that no evolutionary pattern can be seen for the origin of photosynthesis, so the experts are forced to assume that parts of the system exhibited separate origins.
The core of the photosynthetic hardware is the reaction centre. It is a multiprotein complex (maybe ~ 25-30 subunits) surrounded by an antenna of hundreds of chlorophyll molecules. All aerobic photosynthesizers have chlorophyll a. Green algae and land plants also have chlorophyll b. Depending upon the kind of alga, various other accessory pigments can be found in the antenna. Anaerobic but photosynthetic bacteria exhibit other types of the chlorophyll molecule.
Chlorophyll molecules are enigmas. They require 17 or more metabolic steps to complete the synthesis. What could possibly encourage this chemical synthesis to proceed when there was no particular use for the intermediate products? How could the process develop before there was even a use for chlorophyll? The early steps in the formation are identical to heme, a compound important in releasing energy from food. Although presumably the early syntheses of chlorophyll were initially all carried out under anaerobic conditions, now however for the cyanobacteria and eukaryotes, several steps in the synthesis require oxygen. Scientists therefore assume that some genes in the process were replaced by substitutes. The overall pathway, they suggest, remained unchanged while several component genes became completely different than in earlier versions.
The reaction centre and associated antenna are called a photosystem. Depending upon the molecules in the reaction centre, we find photosystem II in purple bacteria, type I in green sulphur bacteria and photosystems II and I in all oxygenic photosynthesis including cyanobacteria and algae and land plants. The reaction centres are so complex that scientists speculate that the core complex developed only once and subsequently underwent major changes. The basic three-dimensional protein structure with associated molecules stayed the same, but the amino acid composition (and DNA sequences) of the molecules changed. [This is a popular evolutionary theory these days, that a protein shape stayed the same while its underlying chemical composition changed entirely. But if the biochemistry is different, how can they say that the molecules are similar, no matter what the outward appearance may suggest. What this situation suggests is the use of a common blueprint.]
The accessory pigments in various photosynthesizing organisms are quite different from each other. The experts conclude that new pigments originated multiple times. [But developing a pigment from scratch that will react to the correct wavelength of light, is no mean trick.] The experts still conclude that the reaction centre/ photosystems only originated once and then underwent complex development. Nobody however has any plausible idea as to how the cyanobacteria (blue green algae) and all eukaryotic photosynthesizers came to require two photosystems. The specialists also have no idea how oxygen came to be a byproduct from capturing light energy.
It is evident that evolutionary speculations cannot explain how such elaborate cellular machinery was ever assembled, nor how the components came together, nor how they work, nor how the whole system appeared spontaneously at a time of low to zero food/energy resources. The more we learn about photosynthesis, the more elaborate we find the process to be. Evolutionary explanations are obviously completely inadequate. God’s plan was perfect. He created plants (the primary producers) ahead of the animal consumers. There never was a time when God did not provide for His creatures. Nothing, not even photosynthesis is too hard for our God to create!
Related Resources
Why “carbon dioxide + water → glucose + oxygen” is the most important equation in biology
Order Online
Paperback / $6.00 / 32 Pages / Full colour
Theories about the evolution of photosynthesis are constrained by two evolutionary assumptions. Firstly, scientists assume that the early earth lacked free oxygen as this would make the chemistry for origin of life scenarios easier to achieve. Also, since any new organisms would very soon need a source of food (i.e. organic carbon), scientists suggest hopefully that photosynthesis originated early in the history of life (before many cells could starve.) But how long would it take for these elaborate molecular systems to develop?
One expert defined photosynthesis and its significance as “the only significant solar energy storage process of Earth and [it] is the source of all of our food and most of our energy resources.” [Robert E. Blankenship. 2010. Early Evolution of Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. October 154(2): 434-438 See p. 434]. Obviously, the importance of this process cannot be overstated since life could not last long without a source of food.
When specialists compare organisms which exhibit the capacity for photosynthesis, they find a hodge-podge of variations rather than clear lines of descent with modification. Dr. Blankenship therefore suggests that different component parts of the process evolved separately [p. 3] and that what we see in organisms today is the result of extensive shuffling of component parts between bacteria via HGT (horizontal gene transfer) (this is the perennial evolutionary cop-out these days). [p. 2] That is why no pattern in various traits can be discerned. Six different phyla of bacteria (including cyanobacteria or blue green algae) exhibit photosynthetic abilities. Among eukaryotes, various kinds of algae and land plants are all able to photosynthesize. We see therefore that no evolutionary pattern can be seen for the origin of photosynthesis, so the experts are forced to assume that parts of the system exhibited separate origins.
The core of the photosynthetic hardware is the reaction centre. It is a multiprotein complex (maybe ~ 25-30 subunits) surrounded by an antenna of hundreds of chlorophyll molecules. All aerobic photosynthesizers have chlorophyll a. Green algae and land plants also have chlorophyll b. Depending upon the kind of alga, various other accessory pigments can be found in the antenna. Anaerobic but photosynthetic bacteria exhibit other types of the chlorophyll molecule.
Chlorophyll molecules are enigmas. They require 17 or more metabolic steps to complete the synthesis. What could possibly encourage this chemical synthesis to proceed when there was no particular use for the intermediate products? How could the process develop before there was even a use for chlorophyll? The early steps in the formation are identical to heme, a compound important in releasing energy from food. Although presumably the early syntheses of chlorophyll were initially all carried out under anaerobic conditions, now however for the cyanobacteria and eukaryotes, several steps in the synthesis require oxygen. Scientists therefore assume that some genes in the process were replaced by substitutes. The overall pathway, they suggest, remained unchanged while several component genes became completely different than in earlier versions.
The reaction centre and associated antenna are called a photosystem. Depending upon the molecules in the reaction centre, we find photosystem II in purple bacteria, type I in green sulphur bacteria and photosystems II and I in all oxygenic photosynthesis including cyanobacteria and algae and land plants. The reaction centres are so complex that scientists speculate that the core complex developed only once and subsequently underwent major changes. The basic three-dimensional protein structure with associated molecules stayed the same, but the amino acid composition (and DNA sequences) of the molecules changed. [This is a popular evolutionary theory these days, that a protein shape stayed the same while its underlying chemical composition changed entirely. But if the biochemistry is different, how can they say that the molecules are similar, no matter what the outward appearance may suggest. What this situation suggests is the use of a common blueprint.]
The accessory pigments in various photosynthesizing organisms are quite different from each other. The experts conclude that new pigments originated multiple times. [But developing a pigment from scratch that will react to the correct wavelength of light, is no mean trick.] The experts still conclude that the reaction centre/ photosystems only originated once and then underwent complex development. Nobody however has any plausible idea as to how the cyanobacteria (blue green algae) and all eukaryotic photosynthesizers came to require two photosystems. The specialists also have no idea how oxygen came to be a byproduct from capturing light energy.
It is evident that evolutionary speculations cannot explain how such elaborate cellular machinery was ever assembled, nor how the components came together, nor how they work, nor how the whole system appeared spontaneously at a time of low to zero food/energy resources. The more we learn about photosynthesis, the more elaborate we find the process to be. Evolutionary explanations are obviously completely inadequate. God’s plan was perfect. He created plants (the primary producers) ahead of the animal consumers. There never was a time when God did not provide for His creatures. Nothing, not even photosynthesis is too hard for our God to create!
Related Resources
Why “carbon dioxide + water → glucose + oxygen” is the most important equation in biology
Order Online
Paperback / $14.00 / 171 Pages / black and white illustrations
Theories about the evolution of photosynthesis are constrained by two evolutionary assumptions. Firstly, scientists assume that the early earth lacked free oxygen as this would make the chemistry for origin of life scenarios easier to achieve. Also, since any new organisms would very soon need a source of food (i.e. organic carbon), scientists suggest hopefully that photosynthesis originated early in the history of life (before many cells could starve.) But how long would it take for these elaborate molecular systems to develop?
One expert defined photosynthesis and its significance as “the only significant solar energy storage process of Earth and [it] is the source of all of our food and most of our energy resources.” [Robert E. Blankenship. 2010. Early Evolution of Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. October 154(2): 434-438 See p. 434]. Obviously, the importance of this process cannot be overstated since life could not last long without a source of food.
When specialists compare organisms which exhibit the capacity for photosynthesis, they find a hodge-podge of variations rather than clear lines of descent with modification. Dr. Blankenship therefore suggests that different component parts of the process evolved separately [p. 3] and that what we see in organisms today is the result of extensive shuffling of component parts between bacteria via HGT (horizontal gene transfer) (this is the perennial evolutionary cop-out these days). [p. 2] That is why no pattern in various traits can be discerned. Six different phyla of bacteria (including cyanobacteria or blue green algae) exhibit photosynthetic abilities. Among eukaryotes, various kinds of algae and land plants are all able to photosynthesize. We see therefore that no evolutionary pattern can be seen for the origin of photosynthesis, so the experts are forced to assume that parts of the system exhibited separate origins.
The core of the photosynthetic hardware is the reaction centre. It is a multiprotein complex (maybe ~ 25-30 subunits) surrounded by an antenna of hundreds of chlorophyll molecules. All aerobic photosynthesizers have chlorophyll a. Green algae and land plants also have chlorophyll b. Depending upon the kind of alga, various other accessory pigments can be found in the antenna. Anaerobic but photosynthetic bacteria exhibit other types of the chlorophyll molecule.
Chlorophyll molecules are enigmas. They require 17 or more metabolic steps to complete the synthesis. What could possibly encourage this chemical synthesis to proceed when there was no particular use for the intermediate products? How could the process develop before there was even a use for chlorophyll? The early steps in the formation are identical to heme, a compound important in releasing energy from food. Although presumably the early syntheses of chlorophyll were initially all carried out under anaerobic conditions, now however for the cyanobacteria and eukaryotes, several steps in the synthesis require oxygen. Scientists therefore assume that some genes in the process were replaced by substitutes. The overall pathway, they suggest, remained unchanged while several component genes became completely different than in earlier versions.
The reaction centre and associated antenna are called a photosystem. Depending upon the molecules in the reaction centre, we find photosystem II in purple bacteria, type I in green sulphur bacteria and photosystems II and I in all oxygenic photosynthesis including cyanobacteria and algae and land plants. The reaction centres are so complex that scientists speculate that the core complex developed only once and subsequently underwent major changes. The basic three-dimensional protein structure with associated molecules stayed the same, but the amino acid composition (and DNA sequences) of the molecules changed. [This is a popular evolutionary theory these days, that a protein shape stayed the same while its underlying chemical composition changed entirely. But if the biochemistry is different, how can they say that the molecules are similar, no matter what the outward appearance may suggest. What this situation suggests is the use of a common blueprint.]
The accessory pigments in various photosynthesizing organisms are quite different from each other. The experts conclude that new pigments originated multiple times. [But developing a pigment from scratch that will react to the correct wavelength of light, is no mean trick.] The experts still conclude that the reaction centre/ photosystems only originated once and then underwent complex development. Nobody however has any plausible idea as to how the cyanobacteria (blue green algae) and all eukaryotic photosynthesizers came to require two photosystems. The specialists also have no idea how oxygen came to be a byproduct from capturing light energy.
It is evident that evolutionary speculations cannot explain how such elaborate cellular machinery was ever assembled, nor how the components came together, nor how they work, nor how the whole system appeared spontaneously at a time of low to zero food/energy resources. The more we learn about photosynthesis, the more elaborate we find the process to be. Evolutionary explanations are obviously completely inadequate. God’s plan was perfect. He created plants (the primary producers) ahead of the animal consumers. There never was a time when God did not provide for His creatures. Nothing, not even photosynthesis is too hard for our God to create!
Related Resources
Why “carbon dioxide + water → glucose + oxygen” is the most important equation in biology
Order Online
Paperback / $10.00 / 141 Pages / Full colour drawings
Theories about the evolution of photosynthesis are constrained by two evolutionary assumptions. Firstly, scientists assume that the early earth lacked free oxygen as this would make the chemistry for origin of life scenarios easier to achieve. Also, since any new organisms would very soon need a source of food (i.e. organic carbon), scientists suggest hopefully that photosynthesis originated early in the history of life (before many cells could starve.) But how long would it take for these elaborate molecular systems to develop?
One expert defined photosynthesis and its significance as “the only significant solar energy storage process of Earth and [it] is the source of all of our food and most of our energy resources.” [Robert E. Blankenship. 2010. Early Evolution of Photosynthesis. Plant Physiol. October 154(2): 434-438 See p. 434]. Obviously, the importance of this process cannot be overstated since life could not last long without a source of food.
When specialists compare organisms which exhibit the capacity for photosynthesis, they find a hodge-podge of variations rather than clear lines of descent with modification. Dr. Blankenship therefore suggests that different component parts of the process evolved separately [p. 3] and that what we see in organisms today is the result of extensive shuffling of component parts between bacteria via HGT (horizontal gene transfer) (this is the perennial evolutionary cop-out these days). [p. 2] That is why no pattern in various traits can be discerned. Six different phyla of bacteria (including cyanobacteria or blue green algae) exhibit photosynthetic abilities. Among eukaryotes, various kinds of algae and land plants are all able to photosynthesize. We see therefore that no evolutionary pattern can be seen for the origin of photosynthesis, so the experts are forced to assume that parts of the system exhibited separate origins.
The core of the photosynthetic hardware is the reaction centre. It is a multiprotein complex (maybe ~ 25-30 subunits) surrounded by an antenna of hundreds of chlorophyll molecules. All aerobic photosynthesizers have chlorophyll a. Green algae and land plants also have chlorophyll b. Depending upon the kind of alga, various other accessory pigments can be found in the antenna. Anaerobic but photosynthetic bacteria exhibit other types of the chlorophyll molecule.
Chlorophyll molecules are enigmas. They require 17 or more metabolic steps to complete the synthesis. What could possibly encourage this chemical synthesis to proceed when there was no particular use for the intermediate products? How could the process develop before there was even a use for chlorophyll? The early steps in the formation are identical to heme, a compound important in releasing energy from food. Although presumably the early syntheses of chlorophyll were initially all carried out under anaerobic conditions, now however for the cyanobacteria and eukaryotes, several steps in the synthesis require oxygen. Scientists therefore assume that some genes in the process were replaced by substitutes. The overall pathway, they suggest, remained unchanged while several component genes became completely different than in earlier versions.
The reaction centre and associated antenna are called a photosystem. Depending upon the molecules in the reaction centre, we find photosystem II in purple bacteria, type I in green sulphur bacteria and photosystems II and I in all oxygenic photosynthesis including cyanobacteria and algae and land plants. The reaction centres are so complex that scientists speculate that the core complex developed only once and subsequently underwent major changes. The basic three-dimensional protein structure with associated molecules stayed the same, but the amino acid composition (and DNA sequences) of the molecules changed. [This is a popular evolutionary theory these days, that a protein shape stayed the same while its underlying chemical composition changed entirely. But if the biochemistry is different, how can they say that the molecules are similar, no matter what the outward appearance may suggest. What this situation suggests is the use of a common blueprint.]
The accessory pigments in various photosynthesizing organisms are quite different from each other. The experts conclude that new pigments originated multiple times. [But developing a pigment from scratch that will react to the correct wavelength of light, is no mean trick.] The experts still conclude that the reaction centre/ photosystems only originated once and then underwent complex development. Nobody however has any plausible idea as to how the cyanobacteria (blue green algae) and all eukaryotic photosynthesizers came to require two photosystems. The specialists also have no idea how oxygen came to be a byproduct from capturing light energy.
It is evident that evolutionary speculations cannot explain how such elaborate cellular machinery was ever assembled, nor how the components came together, nor how they work, nor how the whole system appeared spontaneously at a time of low to zero food/energy resources. The more we learn about photosynthesis, the more elaborate we find the process to be. Evolutionary explanations are obviously completely inadequate. God’s plan was perfect. He created plants (the primary producers) ahead of the animal consumers. There never was a time when God did not provide for His creatures. Nothing, not even photosynthesis is too hard for our God to create!
Related Resources
Why “carbon dioxide + water → glucose + oxygen” is the most important equation in biology
Order Online