In this thought-provoking episode, Dr. Change Tan joins Real Science Radio to delve into the complexities of DNA replication and the stark differences in molecular machinery between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Dr. Tan presents compelling evidence that challenges the conventional theory of a common ancestor. Through a detailed analysis of genes and genomes, he reveals an inviability gap that poses significant questions for the evolutionary timeline. Join the conversation as Dr. Tan shares his personal journey from being an evolutionist to discovering what he believes to be profound evidence for a creator. In his engaging narrative, Dr. Tan discusses how
Greetings to the brightest audience in the country, and welcome to Real Science Radio. Last week, we aired part one of Dr. Chengetan joining Fred and Doug on Real Science Radio. Today is part two. Hope you enjoy. Let’s jump right into the broadcast.
SPEAKER 03 :
So there’s a big gap between pro carryout and eukaryote. Is that what we’re getting at? Yes, it is a big gap.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, if you could allow me to show the slide about DNA replication initiation in bacteria and eukarya. So this is Just bacteria like E. coli and eukaryotes like yeast and us, right? DNA replication initiation. On the left is the DNA replication initiation in bacteria like E. coli and on the right is the DNA replication initiation in eukaryotes like yeast or human. So those are like circles, they represent different proteins, different color represent different proteins, where you may immediately notice that Eukaryotes need many more players to initiate the DNA replication. But the number of players involved is not the key issue here. The key issue is the identity of those proteins.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 04 :
So those used by bacteria is bacteria unique. Specific for bacteria, you do not have anything similar in eukaryotes. And those for eukaryotes, they are eukaryote specific. You do not have anything similar like that in bacteria.
SPEAKER 03 :
So I’m looking at this, and I don’t see how… So you’re saying there’s not a common ancestor.
SPEAKER 04 :
No, so that really questions the idea of a common ancestor. So if you go to the next slide, you’ll see. So basically… Based on the genes involved in bacterial DNA replication, transcription and translation, what we can see is that B-train prokaryotes, including bacteria and archaea and eukaryotes. It’s not even death, it’s inviolability, right? Because if it is death, death means that something used to be alive and then died. But actually what is in between is inviolability because life is impossible there, right? So if we say prokaryotes evolved into eukaryotes, But before you reach to the eukaryotes, the prokaryotes would die, right? Because if an organism could not replicate their genome, could not transcribe their genes, could not translate their genes, that’s the end of their life. They cannot survive any longer, not to say give any offspring. And before you have the machinery for the eukaryotes to replicate their genome, to transcribe their genes, translate their genes, they cannot be alive, right? So before you reach eukaryotes, prokaryotes would have died. right but maybe even if you say well maybe life did not start with a simple like prokaryote and then evolved into eukaryote maybe we started with a complicated life like eukaryotes and then they are simplified streamlined and then we have prokaryotes including bacteria and archaea that could not work either Because bacteria needs their own specific set of genes to replicate their genome, to transcribe their genes, to translate their genes. So it’s not like the eukaryotes become simplified. And then you can have bacteria, right?
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, it sounds like you’re talking about like de-evolving. You’d have to come up with some. So somehow the eukaryote came about first is what you’re saying. Maybe they’ll argue that. But even going backwards, it doesn’t work. Even de-evolving, you can’t go the other direction.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right, right. Because they need to have their own thing, right? It’s not like I’m a simplified version of you. No, I’m myself.
SPEAKER 02 :
And so, Dr. Tan, as an organic chemist, you came at this and looked at it from both directions and realized there was this gulf of inviability no matter what.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. So, well, at this point, I am working as a biologist.
SPEAKER 02 :
Right, right. But as a trained chemist.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah. So, because DNA replication, transcription, and translation are essential for life. Without that, you die. uh if anything yeah if anything goes wrong is that you know you die and not until you have it you cannot survive or at least you cannot make offspring all right if you cannot replicate the dna how can you pass your dna to your uh your offspring yeah that’s a tough yeah no right so this is my starting point uh of uh thinking what i learned from the school or from my colleague about how you know how life all different kinds of life are connected by one big evolutionary tree of life if that’s true then those are vital molecular machinery should you know should be similar in some way so that the life can be continued right so so you can you know you you cannot have like a in uncrossable or unbridgeable gap in between. So that was my starting point. I started to think about what way are taught at a school about how eukaryotes came to be as like evolve from prokaryotes. And later on that also lead me to start to think about the origin of life, right? Yeah, origin of life, origin of biodiversity. That was really my starting point about thinking or questioning about the popular view of origin of life and origin of biodiversity.
SPEAKER 03 :
So how far in were you at the University of Missouri when you started realizing, hey, this is pretty powerful evidence against evolution?
SPEAKER 04 :
I was still an assistant professor at that time because, as I said, we had one year to set up our lab, so I did not need to teach in the first year. But then the second year, we needed, starting from the second year, we needed to teach and from then on I basically almost continuously teaching molecular biology year after year and I Initially, yes, I thought I had a great discovery. So, wow, how come nobody has noticed the differences between bacteria and actually also archaea. DNA replication, transcription, translation, and those used by eukaryotes, right? I said, oh, wow, this is a great discovery. It’s as big as Darwin’s theory of evolution. But then, very quickly, I started to doubt myself because I reminded myself where change, that’s my name, right? You know, the only reason you think like that was because you are ignorant. you were trained as a chemist you did not know much about biology your biology is whatever or wherever your research leads all right okay so must be your ignorance people so many people have been studying evolution for so long so they must have figured out you know even though you look like from what you know a little bit about molecular biology, since there was a big trouble for orange of life and eukaryogenesis, so how eukaryote come to be, right? That’s all because of your ignorance. So I started to read literature on evolution. And the more I read, the more I think, the more I’m convinced that actually I was correct. But the conclusion was not welcomed in the… The university people. So let’s make sure we understand.
SPEAKER 03 :
So your conclusion was that you were right, that evolution isn’t true and there’s actually a creator.
SPEAKER 02 :
And also, Dr. Tan, that this giant discovery that you made had already been discovered by all these people who published on evolution and origin of life. It’s not like they didn’t know that this gulf of inviability existed.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, that’s actually so true. You know, all my evidence was from the research of evolutionary biologists.
SPEAKER 02 :
Right.
SPEAKER 04 :
So I got all my evidence from them. They did all the experiments.
SPEAKER 02 :
Right.
SPEAKER 04 :
They sequenced the genome, they compared the genes, showed me, you know, I can look at the sequence of the genes. And many genomes of genes, right, all the proteomes, so yeah, they, it’s, the evidence is there, it’s there, it’s, how come, you know, some people actually get so close, so, Eugene Cooney, Eugene Cooney, N-I-H, right? So he, a lot of times you read his material, it’s like, you are so close, right? He’s so close to reach to the, you know, true, true conclusion, right? But his view of God limited him because if you push God away, you do not have any choice. you do not have any choice but to accept the idea life came from no life, complicated life evolved from simple ones, all naturally. Because you exclude the supernatural, right? So by God’s grace, I became a Christian before I had that discovery. So I had the freedom to follow the evidence. He did not. I mean, he still does not have the freedom to follow the evidence wherever the evidence leads. But by God’s grace, you know, he brought me from that. I used to be like that, right? I used to be, you know, there’s no God, no creation, no creator. So everything came naturally. I was there.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, yeah. So just to revisit your thought on, it sounded like you said that you kind of questioned yourself when you discovered this gap between prokaryote and eukaryote. When you say that you were starting to question, were you questioning that gap because of your prior indoctrination with evolution? Or was it you were questioning… evolution at that time the reason i’m asking that is because i know a lot of evolutionists i used to have correspondence with dr james crowe he was a geneticist at university of chicago he wrote a lot for science magazine nature magazine and i asked him questions about you know he would write things about how the genetic uh error rate was just too high they’re like why do you believe in evolution he was well it’s proven everywhere else all that you know i know the chemists haven’t figured out the astronomers You know, the paleontologists have it all figured out. Is that kind of what you were alluding to or did I misunderstand that?
SPEAKER 04 :
No, I’m just looking at, for me, everything is genes and the genomes. So I’m just looking at the genes. And based on what we know of, you know, the similarity or dissimilarity of genes and the genomes in different organisms, it really is more reasonable to say that life on Earth is better represented with a forest of life inside of one big tree of life. So that is where I come from. For me, as I said, again, just to repeat myself, everything for me is genes and genomes. It’s not like I’m saying, oh, because the Bible says so, therefore, this and that. No, that’s not where I am from. I come from all genes, genomes. That’s why when I was, so I actually I talked My discoveries about how molecular biology genes, you know, involved in DNA replication, transcription, translation, suggest that not all life have shared a common ancestor. And I told my department chair, say, you know, this is what I found. And I was going to write a book about it. And suddenly this becomes my creationism. And I was a creationist. I was like, that’s my first time of hearing the word of creation.
SPEAKER 03 :
Oh, interesting.
SPEAKER 04 :
And the creationism, right? So I said, that’s all molecular biology. That is my creationism.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, you’re science. You believe in real science.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I was very confused, actually, at the time. But now I know where he came from. I mean, I used to be there, too, as I said, right? I I did not believe in God. I did not believe there was a creator. I believe that everything came naturally.
SPEAKER 03 :
So then you got in trouble with your faculty, and then at some point, it probably didn’t end well at the University of Missouri, I’m guessing.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, true. Yeah.
SPEAKER 03 :
Okay.
SPEAKER 04 :
So the result is I was chased out from the university.
SPEAKER 02 :
Wow. Yeah. Not surprising. And I just wanted to point out that you said that you were in the same place as other evolutionists, even though you might not have known that word before. They were just other molecular biologists. But you were in that same place and you thought you were free when actually you were enslaved to what maybe you now realize is more of an ideology than a science.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. That takes quite a few years before I realized that I was actually not free. So by the way, that’s a part of my name. So a couple of years ago, actually, God showed what my name means. So as I said, yes, in Chinese is Chang’e, but the same letters. Yeah. Chang’e in China, the same letter is change in English.
SPEAKER 02 :
I see.
SPEAKER 04 :
And God showed me that change, you know, chain, chain is like a chain, you chain yourself.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, yeah.
SPEAKER 04 :
Ji in Chinese is a self. So by myself, all I have is a chain I use to chain myself, to bind myself up. Only by God’s grace, I am freed. And now actually I’m freed to follow evidence wherever the evidence leads. I’m not limited. By my religion, right? Or by… Yourself.
SPEAKER 02 :
You said it earlier. Yourself. Yeah.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, freed from myself. Even though still I change myself often, even now.
SPEAKER 03 :
Dr. Tan, what a wonderful testimony and really cool, your whole discovering this huge gap between prokaryote, really an impassable gap between prokaryote and eukaryote. Hey, before we get any further, so Dr. Tan, we like to do this segment, it only lasts about a minute usually, and it involves me pushing often a buzzer that sounds like this. So I’m going to ask Doug the interesting fact of the week.
SPEAKER 02 :
It’s the interesting fact of the week. Everyone’s on the edge of their seat, Fred.
SPEAKER 03 :
And if you can get within 10%, Doug, you get the answer right. So how many times does DNA repair occur a day in human cells, each human cell? How many times a day? Does DNA repair- Are you asking me or asking Doug? No, I’m asking Doug. It wouldn’t be fair to ask you.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I know because I cannot answer this.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah. So how many times does DNA repair take place in one cell in a day? Yes.
SPEAKER 1 :
200,000.
SPEAKER 03 :
I hesitated because that’s not bad, but I’m going to- But you know, that’s not bad actually. So according to what I read, And Dr. Tan can correct me if I’m wrong, but it’s 10,000 times a day to 100,000 times. But 200,000 isn’t bad. That’s not a bad guess. And it could be that.
SPEAKER 02 :
What do you say, Dr. Tan? Wait, wait. Before you answer, Dr. Tan, I just want to let you know it was a complete wild guess, and I just wanted to pick a number that was incredibly high. Because I figured it was a lot more than you might think.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, I agree that the number would be high, but the exact number would depend on the situation where you are, right? Whether you are living in an area with a lot of radioactivity.
SPEAKER 03 :
I was going to say, yeah, if you live near Chernobyl or something, or Three Mile Island.
SPEAKER 04 :
Or in some facilities or whatever.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, that’s true.
SPEAKER 04 :
It’s not everybody’s the same.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, it probably wasn’t the fairest question in the world, but… Well, it is kind of mind-boggling, though, to think that each cell is repairing itself on the order of thousands of times a day. It’s like, how does that not break? It would seem like it would just break.
SPEAKER 03 :
It’s amazing. Yeah, pretty remarkable design. Yep. Hey, so you mentioned your name and how it kind of fits with the whole change thing. I really like that. I wanted to share a really quick story. I love it. You know, years ago I gave a talk. I used to give some creation talks at church in different places. Well, I was giving a talk at church and there was a lady in there who was, she was a skeptic of creation. She was a Christian. I don’t want to doubt her faith or anything. But she was also proud of the fact that she taught in China for like five years. So she considered herself an expert on the Chinese language. Well, at some point in my talk, I showed a symbol. I mentioned the whole connection between the Chinese language and Genesis, that there’s some connection there. And so I showed the symbol for, I think it was ship, and it was like eight people boat. And I showed the symbol, and she’s like, oh, that’s not the number, that’s not the symbol for eight. And I’m like, okay. And she was very adamant. She’s like, oh, I’m an expert in the Chinese language. And I’m like, okay. You know, I’m like, I’ll look into it, because I don’t want to present anything that’s not accurate. So I went, I happened to just started a job at Trimble, Trimble Company, United States. And my boss was Kuang Yi Chin, a uh she was uh she had her phd in electrical engineering and i remembered she had said that oh and i had you know i had an interest i had a master’s in like a history of languages like she’s the perfect person to ask so i went i asked her the next day i go into work i’m like man i can’t believe i’m in this situation where i can actually ask an expert and i said hey hey kwang yi um I told her a story, and I said, so here’s the symbol that I showed that lady. Is it the symbol for eight? And she goes, no. And I’m like, oh, so I guess I’m wrong. She goes, oh, you’re not really wrong, though, because it used to be the symbol for eight. I’m like, yes. And to this day, I’ve never seen that lady again. She never went back to that church. And I so badly wanted to tell her that story, but haven’t been able to. So anyways, I just wanted to share that little story about the Chinese symbols and connection to Genesis. And yeah, so…
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, there are so many words that actually will teach us stories about not only Genesis, not only the boat, right, but the sacrificial, righteousness, those kind of things. Unfortunately, now mainland China has a simplified version of Chinese, so a lot of those original meanings were lost.
SPEAKER 03 :
Oh.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, and that’s what had happened. Yeah, that’s part of the confusion, I think, because you would need to use the traditional Chinese words.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, and she was so proud of herself. Oh, you’re wrong. I’ll never forget that. I’m like, I didn’t know, you know. So it was so refreshing the next day at work to find out, oh, it actually is correct. It’s just not the current symbol for eight. So, okay. Wow. All righty. Well, Dr. Tan, it’s been a super pleasure having you on the show. We heard a lot about you. I think Sal had mentioned your expertise and your story a couple times on different shows we’ve had him on. Again, thank you so much for coming on to Real Science Radio to share your journey with us and your expertise. Do you have anything else in store? What’s in the future for Change Tan? Yes.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, first of all, it’s a pleasure to talk with you. It’s fun. Also, it’s actually encouraging for myself, too.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, good, good. Praise the Lord. We’re here to exhort one another as well and to help one another.
SPEAKER 04 :
Right. I have a long way to go.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, we’ll continue with you. I just want to quickly, before we finish, I just want to quote the source of biodiversity as I was taught it when I was about four years old. my father read this to me from Genesis 1, starting in the 24th verse. And God said, let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind. And it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind. and cattle after their kind, and everything that creepeth upon the earth after his kind. And God saw that it was good. And when I heard that when I was four or five years old, It had the ring of truth to me, and I’ve believed it ever since I was a little kid. And your story changed, and I’m going to stick with change. I like it. It’s easy, brother. Yes, I love it. But your story of coming from an atheistic background and finding God through crisis in your life and through logic and through science… It’s an inspirational story. But I just want to encourage parents out there to understand that what change has shown us today is that the evidence is overwhelming. Don’t be shy about teaching your children when they’re very young that God is real and about His creation because it will save them from… It will save them from the potential of a disaster in their life that they simply don’t have to go through if we teach our children what we know is right because God has revealed it to us through His Word and through His Son and through our own salvation. And Dr. Tan, Change, just thank you very much. It’s been a total blessing having you on.
SPEAKER 04 :
Well, I want to add on your…
SPEAKER 01 :
Stop the tape. Stop the tape. Hey, this is Dominic Enyart jumping into the broadcast, and we are out of time here on KLTT Radio. If you want the entirety of this broadcast, you can find that by visiting rsr.org. That stands for Real Science Radio, rsr.org. Again, rsr.org for the remainder of this program.
In this thought-provoking episode, Dr. Change Tan joins Real Science Radio to delve into the complexities of DNA replication and the stark differences in molecular machinery between prokaryotes and eukaryotes. Dr. Tan presents compelling evidence that challenges the conventional theory of a common ancestor. Through a detailed analysis of genes and genomes, he reveals an inviability gap that poses significant questions for the evolutionary timeline. Join the conversation as Dr. Tan shares his personal journey from being an evolutionist to discovering what he believes to be profound evidence for a creator. In his engaging narrative, Dr. Tan discusses how
