DNA needs proteins to form; Proteins need DNA (Talk.Origins)
DNA needs certain proteins in order to replicate. Proteins need DNA to form. Neither could have formed naturally without the other already in existence.
- Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, pp. 47-48.
- Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. 1985. Life--How Did It Get Here? Brooklyn, NY, pg. 45.
(Talk.Origins quotes in blue)
1. DNA could have evolved gradually from a simpler replicator; RNA is a likely candidate, since it can catalyze its own duplication. The RNA itself could have had simpler precursors, such as peptide nucleic acids. A deoxyribozyme can both catalyze its own replication and function to cleave RNA -- all without any protein enzymes.
This really does not solve the problem. The DNA still needs the protein and the protein still needs the DNA. To function, both still need to come into their present form at the same time. If the first nucleotides of DNA formed without the needed proteins, they would be lost when the theoretical organism divided because they would not be copied. If encoding for the proteins had evolved in the RNA, the cell would have no reason to make it and it would mutate out of existence.
Even if they did happen to occur at the same time the cell would still need to know to make the proteins and where to send them to be used with the DNA. So rather than solving the problem the RNA argument only adds a new set of problems that need to be answered.
The Chicken or the Egg, DNA or Protein? by Sean D. Pitman M.D.