- Some questions frequently asked by houseowners : where did life come from?
♥ even the simplest single-celled life is stupendously complex. a humble bacterium is full of incredibly sophisticated nano-machines that it needs to live. a cell needs a minimum of over 400 different proteins to make the machines that are absolutely essential for life. how could these protein-based machines make themselves, even if all the right ingredients (20 different amino acids, but many of each) could make themselves? the amino acids, often thousands of them, have to be joined together in the correct order for each protein to function. take a protein 329 amino acids in length. what would be the chance of getting this one protein by chance, assuming that the correct, and only the correct, amino acid ingredients were present? calculate it this way: 1/20 x 1/20 x 1/20 … 329 times! this is a probability of 1 in 10^428 . even if every atom in the universe (10^80) represented an experiment for every molecular vibration possible (10^12 per second) for the supposed evolutionary age of the universe (14 billion years=10^18 seconds), this would allow ‘only’ 10^110 experiments—a long, long way short of the number needed to have a ghost of a chance of getting just this one protein to form, let alone the over 400 others needed. http://creation.com/who-created-god @andymanec “in the lab, it has been shown that rna chains of less than 200bp can have enzymatic activity and self-replicate with high fidelity”. can you give a reference? why do atheists say they come from dumb unguided chaotic random events & not intelligent design but then they say they are rational?
♥ unclefester nobody thinks you are rational locke the bacteria actually prove there is a limitation to change. i strongly suggest you visit creation . com to educate yourself. i can tell you are a kid but you can still learn science. firenuts please contact yahoo answers support to address the reports we are getting about you. you are illegally stalking and harassing people. please research this offense and there is a new law in 2017 and what you are doing is illegal. please contact us to address your stalking issues. to questioner. i wanted to compliment you on your truly epic answer. finally some wisdom coming out of yahoo answers. bravo and encore. awesome https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qigt32vztcq video video videohow do "living fossils" remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years?
♥ "living fossil" is a term used by evolutionist scientists to describe plants and animals which were either considered extinct until living examples are found or which, though never considered extinct, are now the sole or rare examples of species known more abundantly from fossils. the coelacanth is considered to be an example of living fossil by evolutionists. plants * araucaria araucana or monkey-puzzle tree * cycads * wollemia * neolecta animals * okapi * red panda * opossum * tuatara * platypus * echidna how do "living fossils" remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years, if evolution has changed worms into humans in the same time frame? professor gould wrote, “the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem.” gould, stephen j. and niles eldredge. "punctuated equilibrium comes of age." nature 366 (1993): 223-224. print. link(s): morris, henry. "the profusion of living fossils." institute for creation research. icr, n.d. web. 18 jun. 2012. http://www.icr.org/article/774/ batten, don. "living fossils: a powerful argument for creation." creation.com. creation ministries international, 2011. web. 18 jun. 2012. http://creation.com/werner-living-fossils iiwintermuteii, i appreciate your response to my question. it is true that the term "living fossil" is misleading on the part of both sides of the creation vs. evolution debate, i like to offer my insight on chance as it pertains to evolution. "you have to understand that evolution is a chance thing." chance is an apparently random occurrence of an event. an entire branch of mathematics known as probability and statistics is devoted to studying and analyzing chance. in many christian faiths, true chance does not exist, as god has a preordained purpose for everything. chance therefore reflects man's limitations on understanding rather than an underlying causality or lack of purpose. albert einstein famously criticized the central role of chance in the theory of quantum mechanics by declaring, "god does not play dice." einstein was a determinist who did not believe in free will. so, if true chance does not happen, then evolution does not happen in th e past; determining evolution is not falsifiable as if cannot be proven nor disproven to be observable. iiwintermuteii, you are right. us human beings are lucky to be here with a purpose. i meant to say that you cannot determine evolution is not falsifiable as if cannot be disproven to be a valid theory. it is an origins science; it studies past singularities rather than present normalities. that science focuses on things that are believed only to happened once and, by their nature, are unlikely to happen again. it is more like a forensic science rather than being an empirical science and due to impossibility to repeat past events, it uses analogies between the kinds of cause-effect relationships that we see today. origin science claims to give only plausible answers rather than definitive ones. it tries to study the remaining evidence of past events and measure interpretations by their explanatory power. origins science "deals with the origin of things in the past—unique, unrepeatable, unobservable events." evolution deals with something like that.