From the ICR’s URCall series of videos, hosted by Markus Lloyd. (link)
DNA, RNA, and proteins are “biomolecules” which, together, are essential for life. DNA and RNA are needed to make protein. Protein and RNA are needed to make more DNA. DNA and protein are needed to make RNA. So – which came first? Evolution doesn’t have an answer. But creation scientists do.
And that answer is, of course, “God did it.”
Here’s a slightly different question: how do we get metal? The answer of course involves mining, but have you ever noticed that the trucks and bulldozers and detonators used in this process all also require metal in some way? A conundrum emerges: how did it all start? Did Lloyd’s god give Adam and Eve a Caterpillar truck and a stick of dynamite when they left Eden? I don’t think so.
The road to the correct solution requires you to realise at least these two things: first, that technology progresses, meaning that the metal used to make the truck could have been mined via a different tool, superseded by the new transport; and second that minerals were a lot more accessible before we grabbed all the bits of iron etc that once lay near or at the surface. The upshot of all this is that the self-reliant processes used today are not the be all and end all when it comes to discovering their true origins.
The ICR’s “creation scientists” then are not prepared to do their job and actually investigate how life arose, beyond making these simplistic and flawed arguments. Other’s are a bit more rigorous: the RNA world hypothesis comes from the observation that RNA is actually capable of doing the other two molecules’ jobs, albeit not as well; metabolism first, on the other hand, notes that you can do some fairly interesting things before you need any of the three at all.
Someday we may know which of our many ideas is correct, but we wont do so by approaching the world with blinders on.