quote:
But, your statement actually accurately describes the sad state of the scientific community today- in the way that Team Darwin ruthlessly crushes any and all challenges to the theory of evolution.

Eh. Do you really have any "challenges" to the theory?

3 ...

Report Post

Posted by troyt37

Member since Mar 2008

13366 posts

Posted on 4/11/24 at 6:52 pm to Mo Jeaux

Eh. Do you really have any "challenges" to the theory?

Sure. Tell me how life spontaneously erupts from non living matter, and when this phenomena has been documented, tested, and recreated.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by RobbBobb

Matt Flynn, BCS MVP

Member since Feb 2007

28090 posts

Posted on 4/11/24 at 7:59 pm to Mo Jeaux

quote:
Do you really have any "challenges" to the theory?

Yep, your timeline sucks. Evolutionists readily admit it

Theres just not enough time to go from Big bang, the earth cooling, life to begin, then DNA to evolve to where we are today. Thats why they keep bumping back the age of the universe. Mind you, they have no proof of its actual age, but they do keep bumping back the start date to fit evolutionary patterns

Then theres those major insertions into previous evolution theory to account for the lack of a believable time frame: branching or linear or convergent evolution, great oxidation event, mass extinctions, punctuated equilibrium, Cambrian explosion, lack of an adequate fossil record

quote:
Molecular clock methodology is undergoing a period of development unparalleled in the half century since the molecular clock hypothesis was first formulated. Many of these components, like tip-calibration, the morphological clock and the FBD model, are at an early stage of development and current applications may not stand the test of time. There is a promise of developing into a fully integrative framework for calibrating the Tree of Life to geologic time, including all of its branches, living and dead.

Its just not there yet. And likely wont ever be in your lifetime. And more realistically, never will be

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Prodigal Son

Member since May 2023

753 posts

Posted on 4/11/24 at 10:26 pm to Mo Jeaux

quote:
Eh. Do you really have any "challenges" to the theory?

Evolutionists believe that humans share a common ancestor with the great apes of Africa. They say "hominins" are the human lineage arising from that ancestor. A 2015 paper calculated how long it would take to change the nucleotides in hominin DNA. These excerpts from it will shock you: "Given the unique capabilities of humans, an evolving hominin population (as would give rise to modern man) would need to establish a great deal of new information." "It is estimated that it only took six million years for the chimp and human genomes to diverge by over 5%, representing about 150 million nucleotide differences." "The gene can range in size from about 1,000 to more than one million nucleotides long. A typical human gene is roughly 50,000 nucleotides long. A new gene is thought to arise from a previously existing gene, with the mutation/selection process establishing mutations within a long text string that is already established and functional." "It is now generally recognized that beneficial mutations are rare, and that high-impact beneficial mutations are extremely rare. In higher life forms where population sizes are modest, the mutation rate per nucleotide per generation is normally extremely low (about 10-8). This means that the waiting time for a specific nucleotide within single chromosomal lineage would be 100 million generations." "We simulated a classic pre-human hominin population of at least 10,000 individuals, with a generation time of 20 years, using the numerical simulation program Mendel’s Accountant (Mendel version 2.4.2, now being released as 2.5)." "Biologically realistic numerical simulations revealed that a population of this type required inordinately long waiting times to establish even the shortest nucleotide strings. To establish a string of two nucleotides required on average 84 million years. To establish a string of five nucleotides required on average 2 billion years. We found that waiting times were reduced by higher mutation rates, stronger fitness benefits, and larger population sizes. However, even using the most generous feasible parameter settings, the waiting time required to establish any specific nucleotide string within this type of population was consistently prohibitive." "Even given very substantial fitness effects, the waiting time for a specific point mutation ranged between 1.5 and 15.9 million years" which "is very sobering, since it is estimated that mankind evolved from a chimp-like creature in just 6 million years." "As string length increased linearly, the increase in waiting time was of an exponential nature. When there were as many as six nucleotides in the string, the average waiting time (4.24 billion years) approached the estimated age of the earth. When there were eight nucleotides in the string, the average waiting time (18.5 billion years), exceeded the estimated age of the universe." "Our results generally represent best-case scenarios in terms of minimizing waiting time. When we use more realistic parameter settings for our simulations, we consistently get much longer waiting times." "When a population faces a specific evolutionary challenge, a specific fix is needed, and it must arise in a timely fashion. Positive selection cannot generally begin to resolve an evolutionary challenge until just the right mutation (or mutations) happens at just the right position (or positions). Selection for the required trait can only begin after the mutation (or mutations) result in a substantial (selectable) improvement in total biological functionality." "The creation and fixation of a string of three (requiring at least 380 million years) would be extremely untimely adaptation in the face of any type of pressing evolutionary challenge (and trivial in effect), in terms of the evolution of modern man" who has "a genome with over three billion nucleotides." "We need multiple point mutations to arise on the same short strand of DNA, which is very difficult. While a population is waiting (through deep time) for the correct string to arise, genetic drift is systematically eliminating almost all the string variants. Nearly all of the time there will be essentially zero strings anywhere in the population that are even close to the target string." "It is widely thought that a larger population size can eliminate the waiting time problem. While our simulations show that larger populations do help reduce waiting time, we see that the benefit of larger population size produces rapidly diminishing returns. When we increase the hominin population from 10,000 to 1 million, the waiting time for creating a string of five is only reduced from two billion to 482 million years. This amount of time approximates the estimated time required for the evolution of worm-like creatures into people. When we extrapolate our data to a population size of ten million we still get a waiting time of 202 million years. Even when we extrapolate to a population size of one billion we still have a waiting time of 40 million years." "A bigger population increases the number of mutations arising per generation, but does not increase the number of mutations per short DNA strand (mutation density). To create a complete set of linked mutations requires many mutations arising on the same short stretch of a given DNA molecule." "Numerous other researchers have come to similar conclusions. The long waiting times we report here are even supported indirectly by the papers that have argued against a serious waiting time problem. When examined carefully, those papers indicate that for a hominin-type population, waiting times are as long or even longer than we report here." It is true that "during the waiting time period for a functional string to be established at a given location, other beneficial mutational strings can be happening in other parts of the genome." "However, those other strings are not likely to meet the same specific evolutionary need that our target string can meet. Evolution often needs a specific fix to a specific problem, and that fix must be timely in order to retain relevance." "Even if all of the ~20,000 genes in the hominin genome were already poised for a significant enhancement and all of them were waiting for their own specific string, each one of those potential enhancements would have its own severe waiting time problem." "Furthermore, this would be happening in the context of countless nearly-neutral deleterious mutations throughout the genome which would drift to fixation within the same deep time. Unless there was very strong purifying selection operating for all the nucleotides in the general region of the string, the context of the string would be erased long before the string itself actually arose." "The waiting time problem becomes very severe when more than one mutation is required to establish a new function. This is a very interesting theoretical dilemma."-- Sanford, John, Wesley Brewer, Franzine Smith and John Baumgardner. September 17, 2015. The waiting time problem in a model hominin population. Theoretical Biology and Medical Modelling, Vol. 12, No. 1, Article 18, 28 pages, DOI: 10.1186/s12976-015-0016-z.

2 ...

Report Post

O-T Lounge - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board