OPEN Challenge to all Evolutionists

Too much work!

1000 years is not enough time for that much change.

Frogs are eukaryotic. Microbes (I'm assuming you mean bacteria) are prokaryotic. They are orders of magnitude less advanced that eukaryotic cells that make up like forms from fungi to humans.

In short, one would need the resources of an entire planet and 1 billion plus years to produce an organism as sufficiently advanced as a 'six legged frog'.

Nice try though.

yea moran

I have said you can do anything you wish to the genes save direct manipulation/changing -- and you still refuse?

how about a buttman instead?

I never refused. I just said you would have to wait 1 billion plus years if you want to take an initial stock of prokaryotic organisms and end up with a more complex eukaryotic organism.

replication + random mutation + natural selection = evoltion.

This equation holds true in any medium - it is the sheerest ignorance to deny it!

The Improbability of Evolution
By Mark Nash

In the human genome, there are four possible combinations of amino acids called nucleotides. There are 3.2 billion nucleotides. The possible combinations would be four times four times four—repeatedly multiplying by four a total of 3.2 billion times.

The Human Genome Project, a joint international effort to unravel the structure of genetic material of humans, has determined that a genetic mutation of one billionth of a genome is always fatal. That means for a human, a random change of three nucleotides is fatal, thereby ending any further possibility of evolution for that individual’s offspring.

Evolutionists claim that chimpanzees are the closest living relatives to man, with a difference of about 48 million nucleotides. This means at least 48 million random events must have occurred in exactly the right order for the evolutionary gap between man and his hypothesized common ancestor with chimpanzee to have been spanned. Three changes in the genome during one generation would be fatal and stop the process. Therefore this number of changes would require a minimum of 24 million generations to achieve, assuming two changes happened during each generation.

These changes must happen in exactly the proper order, and each step must produce either no noticeable change or provide the offspring with some sort of advantage. Any negative change would stop or prolong the process. Each change must occur in a gene that is passed on to an offspring, and the offspring must survive and must undergo some further sort of change and have offspring and so on for each of the 48 million genetic changes.

Next, since there are 3.2 billion nucleotides in the human genome, the probability of one particular nucleotide being altered is 3.2 billion to one. To determine the mathematical probability of the genetic changes necessary for the hypothesized “evolution” between chimps and man, it is necessary to multiply 3.2 billion times 48 million.

The probability against the evolution from a common ancestor with chimps to modern man, using these figures, is 153 quadrillion (153 followed by 15 zeros) to one.

The scope of 153 quadrillion is incomprehensible. To illustrate the size of this number: If one number is counted every second (1, 2, 3, 4, etc.), it would take over 200 million years longer than the estimated age of the Earth to reach 153 quadrillion.
[link to www.thetrumpet.com]









"The probability of life having originated through random choice at any one of the 1046 occasions is about 10-255. The smallness of this number means that it is virtually impossible that life has originated by a random association of molecules. The proposition that a living structure could have arisen in a single event through random association of molecules must be rejected." [Quastler, Henry. The Emergence of Biological Organization, New Haven and London, Yale University Press, 1964, p. 7.]

"To get a cell by chance would require at least one hundred functional proteins to appear simultaneously in one place. That is one hundred simultaneous events each of an independent probability. [Denten, Michael. Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, Warwickshire, Burnett Books Limited, 1985]

100 parts can combine in 9.3325832 x 10157 different possible ways. A cell, however, cannot be thrown together just any old way. Life is a delicate balance and only a very delicate combination will result in it.

The problem is to see if 30 billion years is long enough for 100 parts to randomly combine at one billion billion billion billion per second, and the result be life. The equation is simple. 30 billion years equals 3 x 1010 years. One billion billion billion billion equals 1 x 1036. 30 billion years of seconds equals 3 x 1010 x 365 (days) x 24 (hours) x 60 (minutes) x 60 (seconds). This equals 9.4608 x 1017 seconds. We take the total number of seconds, 9.4608 x 1017, and multiply it by the number of combinations per second which is one billion billion billion billion or 1 x 1036. The equation would be 9.4608 x 1017 seconds times 1 x 1036 combinations per second. This equals 9.4608 x 1053 combinations. This means there are still approximately 10104 combinations left to perform. This is not nearly enough time to allow a simple cell with only 100 parts to pop into life. The probability of the cell forming is zero.

"The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less we can believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer." [R. Dawkins, "The Necessity of Darwinism". New Scientist, Vol. 94, April 15, 1982, p. 130.]

You don't know enough about evolution to even know what you don't know. You're challenge demonstrates breathtaking ignorance.

The above is obviously intended to impress the ignorant, but has virtually no scientific credibility.

I have an open challenge to you OP. If a god created everything, tell us exactly how he did it. Use the same standards of proof that you insist on for evolutionists.

Just saying god "poofed" everything into existence doesn't cut it. Explain the details of where he got the energy, how much he used, and how much he has left. Explain how much time he used to create everything and in what particular order.

Keep in mind that every time you leave out some detail, it will be considered a "missing link" and every time you don't have an answer for each step that you believe this god took when creating everything, it will be considered as a breach of your theory.

Go to work OP, -- I can't wait.

Haha. OP has been owned biatch!

I was tempted to try and at least talk about some of it, but considering the first three lines are wrong i basically gave up, its far too much effort.

This is a major theme with creationists here, they copy paste shit of the internet that requires a highly technical explanation that requires a considerable amount of effort on the part of the responder.

Last Edited by Atheist on 07/23/2010 04:42 AM

You need to look at the rate of inflation for the next 1,000 years.

Try explaining to the OP that chloroplasts or mitochondria in eukaryotic organisms are a result of endosymbiosis, and that originally they were probably prokaryotic bacteria themselves.

This process and build up to eukaryotic complexity in terms of functional organelles probably took hundreds of millions if not a billion years before multicelluar organisms developed.

Last Edited by Atheist on 07/22/2010 07:05 PM

Busy, busy perhaps another day.

Hahahaha! Essentially, this is the game of hide the pea under the nutshell using words. It's meant to confuse and mislead. The math doesn't add up, there are too many variables that aren't even considered.

Well for a start the statements that the numbers are based on are wrong, the numbers are pulled out of thin air and trying to deconstruct it and stating reasons becomes a complicated jumbled mess.

But yeah its pretty deceptive really.

The OP never mentioned God. Just saying.