I went to
Ask.com - What's Your Question? with "define vitamin" and selected two definitions:
noun: any of a group of organic substances essential in small quantities to normal metabolism
Vitamins Definition: Vitamin are a group of substances essential for normal metabolism, growth and development, and regulation of cell function
He threw a little bit extra in there, but a) If we could generate the molecules we would not need to get them ready made and we would not think of them as vitamins and b) that's not the point of my question.
He is fundamentally correct about vitamins, if overly exuberant. The question is: He claims that since we have lost the ability to construct multiple vitamins, this loss could not be the results of evolution as postulated by the theory of evolution (TOE). I say it is valid. He uses this as an example to support his belief in a god. I say that even if his declaration is true and that even if the TOE could not justify auxotrophy, it would still not no be a valid argument for god. An error on one theory does not imply that an another theory is right.
Summary: I ask if you agree on two points:
1) Do you agree or disagree that the TOE supports auxotropy as I claim it does and he opposes?
2) Do you agree or disagree that the alleged defect in the TOE really has no bearing on his argument for a god?
And of course, Why?
Thank you.