Evolutionary story-tellers (ESTs) want us to believe that organelles such as mitochondria and chloroplasts have evolved through the process of endosymbiosis. Basically their logic is such: one upon a time there was a big bacterium B and small bacterium S. B was always swallowing S and devouring it up until certain time when all of a sudden B and S (predator and prey) decided to cohabit and live in piece. That this is a fact (exactly, for ESTs this is an undeniable fact without doubt) they bring 2 lines of "evidence". First, S has 2 membranes, inner and outer. Inner membrane is similar to bacterial membrane and outer membrane is similar to eukaryotic membrane. Second, S possesses circular DNA which is found in bacteria. This bedtime story is all gaps and no science. Reasons are multiple:1)
Both B and S before they became BS (
) were independently living organisms. This means that both possessed all the functions (including production of energy rich molecules or some type of energy producing source, maintenance of homeostasis, replication, response to environmental stimuli and so on) necessary for life. None of them were deficient of anything that would prevent their survival. Thus, there was no need at all to start endosymbiotic relationship
. There's no rational explanation from ESTs why this should have happened.2)
On one hand B was prokaryotic organism meaning that it had no nucleus, had circular DNA and had a cell wall (which would become outer cell wall for S) similar to prokaryotic cell wall. This means that A) outer cell wall for S should be more like a bacterial cell wall and not like a eukaryotic cell wall; B) B's genome should be composed of circular DNA and not a eukaryotic like DNA encased in nuclear membrane as is the case for prokaryotes. We know that prokaryotes have nuclear membrane with totally different chromosomes within the membrane since by the time BS was formed B was prokaryote. Simply put there was no nuclear membrane in B. Please notice that I'm using same logic as is used by ESTs. So, if any EST counteracts this argument by introducing more nighttime stories saying S's outer membrane in BS stage evolved later and became prokaryote-like and somehow B while being in early BS stage later gained nucleus miraculously and changed their genome from circular to more complex one, they will counteract their arguments too. Plus, they will introduce huge gaps which has no scientific logic and no shred of evidence to support their nighttime stories.3)
Since most of the proteins necessary for mitochondrial or chloroplastic functions are coded in nuclear DNA then after forming nucleated form of BS either large amount of genetic material of S was somehow transferred to BS's nucleus or S just lost large amount of genetic material and the same genes were manufactured the novo in nucleated BS's nucleus. Which nighttime story they chose that's up to them. Main question though is: Can ESTs deal with so much unsurmountable problems?
They can't but I'm sure they will still call their stories undoubtable scientific theory based on facts.