evolution construction method?

This question is not about evolution. It is about gestation of an embryo.

I point this out because everything you ask is relevant regardless of what you believe about evolution. As such, it is instructive.

Physics, chemistry, and biology all have answers for the questions you ask ... answers that require no more a need to invoke "intelligence", than there is "intelligence" involved in the way a plant uses photosynthesis to assemble sugar molecules.

None of the atoms are "created" by either the mother or the embryo. All atoms incorporated into our bodies either existed at the time of formation of the earth and sun from previous generation stars, or occasionally from radioactive decay of other atoms during the lifespan of the earth. These processes of nucleosynthesis and nuclear decay are well understood by physicists and astrophysicists, and do not need to invoke the concept of guiding "intelligence" to explain them.

These atoms are assembled into molecules by well-understood chemical and biochemical processes. These are not mysterious processes that need "intelligence" to run, any more than we need to invoke "intelligence" to explain how the cells in your pancreas are able to manufacture insulin molecules from molecular building blocks found in your blood from the act of eating and digesting food.

To answer one of your questions, there are no 'builder cells' that either procure the necessary molecules, nor travel to specific locations to 'place' materials. While a perfectly plausible explanation, there is just no evidence of such 'builder cells.' Instead, every cell in your body has the instructions for producing every molecule your body needs. But certain cells 'specialize' in executing the instructions needed to produce certain molecules.

But let me cut to the heart of what I think your question is, and why (I think) you framed it as an evolution question (despite not mentioning evolution at all).

in all cases, the universe seems to 'know' how to create certain structures from raw materials. The core of a star seems to 'know' how to build oxygen and carbon atoms from the fusion of lighter atoms like hydrogen and helium. The process of formation of a heavy planet seems to 'know' how to form water molecules from hydrogen and oxygen atoms. Similar, but slightly more involved chemical processes seem to 'know' how to assemble amino acids from other chemical building blocks containing the infinitely chainable carbon atoms. Plants seem to 'know' how to assemble protein molecules from amino acids and water, just as your pancreas seems to 'know' how to assemble amino acids inti insulin molecules. And yes, the single cell of a newly fertilized embryo seems to 'know' how to arrange itself into specialized tissues and organs that can take on the job of manufacturing the necessar molecules needed by the body.

At each stage, we can analyze the process involved in terms of simpler laws of the universe. At each stage we can ask how those simpler laws *got there* ... but we keep finding simpler laws to explain that too.

But we need to be very careful with invoking the word "intelligence" whenever we encounter a process we do not yet understand, simply because without understanding that process, we have a sense of the universe 'knowing' how to create something. I see no problem believing, as a matter of faith, that an overriding "intelligence" is at work creating all these laws that create processes from other processes. But the danger comes in when saying that "intelligence" is the only way to explain a *specific* process ... such as the assembly of an embryo. The danger lies in betting one's *faith* in that proposition. Because then we shut off our minds from any further search for an explanation of that process. We shut our minds off from seeking any deeper understanding than "some intelligence somewhere simply wanted it that way."

It is a very tempting trap. Be careful.

----

Speaking exclusively of protein biosynthesis, the egg cell is formed with ribosomes as the ovaries are developing in the pregnancy from which the mother was born. These ribosomes are used to create proteins from the DNA of the fertilized egg. These ribosomes came from the grandmother and her's from her mother, etc. etc. ad infinitum.

When a pregnant woman eats, the food is broken down into basic nutrients by her digestive system. These nutrients circulate around her blood and some of them circulate down to her uterus where they interface with the placenta. These nutrients can be transferred from maternal blood to fetal blood by crossing over into the placenta. Once they reach the fetal circulation, they are taken into the fetal cells and utilized by the biomachinery inside the fetal cells to create new complex molecules, such as proteins.

If you are wondering where the biosynthetic pathways originated (i.e. where the first ribosomes came from) I think the answer is we don't particularly know. We have some educated guesses, but for the most part it's hard to pin down precisely. Likely the very first cells were formed by lightning strikes in a Carbon rich ocean, which formed a simple single layer lipid micelle membrane, and a simple RNA "genome" which could have also formed RNA Ribozymes to reproduce itself. Sometime later the RNA could have arranged itself into a ribosome which would allow the RNA to be converted to proteins.

Generally speaking, the question you are asking does not have one simple answer. If you really want to know more about it, I suggest you go out and get a PhD in biochemistry, because it's about the only way you'll ever even make a dent in fully answering your question as it is written.

The best way to determine if Darwinian evolution occurred or not, is to study the fossil record. In 1980 there was a conference called "Micro evolution" at Chicago's Field Museum of Natural History. The paleontologists informed the biologists that the fossil record does not, and never will support the Darwinian scenario. Instead the rocks show that new life forms appear suddenly, with no transitional forms leading to them, followed by long periods of stability during which there is little or no change. Stephen Jay Gould, the famous Harvard evolutionist, said this was "the trade secret of Paleontology". The evidence did not change his mind about evolution, but made him come up with the theory that evolution happen in great leaps, in order to get around the facts.

The process why which the molecules are brought together to their respective locations is called protein biosynthesis. I've linked the wikipedia page for you.

If your other question about where the elements came from, that is due to a process known as nucleosynthesis which takes place in the cores of stars. I have linked that one too.