Check users, creationist, Administrators
22,649
edits
Mutation: Difference between revisions
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to navigationJump to search
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary |
|||
| Line 87: | Line 87: | ||
This is patently impossible as science coupled with mathematics has shown us. Simply put the odds of getting two mutations that are related to one another is the product of their separate probabilities. If every 10<sup>7</sup> duplications of DNA a mutation occurs the equation would start to look like this; 10<sup>7</sup> x 10<sup>7</sup> or 10<sup>14</sup>. That is a one followed by 14 zeroes, or once every hundred trillion for just two related mutations. Mutations which are related or not would barely change finch beak sizes due to drought, or change the shape of a fly wing. | This is patently impossible as science coupled with mathematics has shown us. Simply put the odds of getting two mutations that are related to one another is the product of their separate probabilities. If every 10<sup>7</sup> duplications of DNA a mutation occurs the equation would start to look like this; 10<sup>7</sup> x 10<sup>7</sup> or 10<sup>14</sup>. That is a one followed by 14 zeroes, or once every hundred trillion for just two related mutations. Mutations which are related or not would barely change finch beak sizes due to drought, or change the shape of a fly wing. | ||
What are the odds of getting three related mutations? That is, again taking into account the mutation rate of duplicated DNA, one in a billion trillion or 10<sup>21</sup>. Suddenly the [[ocean]] isn't big enough to hold enough bacteria to make that chance very likely. You can quickly tell that at just three related mutations, evolution via related, dependant mutational change through [[natural selection]] as its mechanism to produce truly novel information or molecule-to-man change is woefully inadequate. <ref>[http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0025-1909(196806)14%3A10%3CB638%3AMCTTNI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5 Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution] (Wistar Institute Press, 1967)</ref> | What are the odds of getting three related mutations? That is, again taking into account the mutation rate of duplicated DNA, one in a billion trillion or 10<sup>21</sup>. Suddenly the [[ocean]] isn't big enough to hold enough bacteria to make that chance very likely. You can quickly tell that at just three related mutations, evolution via related, dependant mutational change through [[natural selection]] as its mechanism to produce truly novel information or molecule-to-man change is woefully inadequate. <ref>[http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0025-1909(196806)14%3A10%3CB638%3AMCTTNI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-5 Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution] (Wistar Institute Press, 1967)</ref> <ref>Dr. Gary Parker. ''Creation: Facts of Life'' [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/cfol/ch2-mutations.asp] </ref> | ||
====Protein folds==== | ====Protein folds==== | ||
