naijadeyhia:


Anytime bro

I'll send a pm.

CoolUsername:


Pick up your mic because there are RNA molecules that exclusively copy molecules of opposite orientation. It even works when there is a orientations in the chain.

Second rebuttal.


According to the most-widely accepted theory of evolution today, the sole mechanism for producing evolution is that of random mutation combined with natural selection. Mutations are random changes in genetic systems. Natural selection is considered by evolutionists to be a sort of sieve, which retains the "good" mutations and allows the others to pass away.

Since random changes in ordered systems almost always will decrease the amount of order in those systems, nearly all mutations are harmful to the organisms which experience them. Nevertheless, the evolutionist insists that each complex organism in the world today has arisen by a long string of gradually accumulated good mutations preserved by natural selection. No one has ever actually observed a genuine mutation occurring in the natural environment which was beneficial (that is, adding useful genetic information to an existing genetic code), and therefore, retained by the selection process. For some reason, however, the idea has a certain persuasive quality about it and seems eminently reasonable to many people—until it is examined quantitatively, that is!

For example, consider a very simple putative organism composed of only 200 integrated and functioning parts, and the problem of deriving that organism by this type of process. The system presumably must have started with only one part and then gradually built itself up over many generations into its 200-part organization. The developing organism, at each successive stage, must itself be integrated and functioning in its environment in order to survive until the next stage. Each successive stage, of course, becomes statistically less likely than the preceding one, since it is far easier for a complex system to break down than to build itself up. A four-component integrated system can more easily "mutate" (that is, somehow suddenly change) into a three-component system (or even a four-component non-functioning system) than into a five-component integrated system. If, at any step in the chain, the system mutates "downward," then it is either destroyed altogether or else moves backward, in an evolutionary sense.

Therefore, the successful production of a 200-component functioning organism requires, at least, 200 successive, successful such "mutations," each of which is highly unlikely. Even evolutionists recognize that true mutations are very rare, and beneficial mutations are extremely rare—not more than one out of a thousand mutations are beneficial, at the very most.

But let us give the evolutionist the benefit of every consideration. Assume that, at each mutational step, there is equally as much chance for it to be good as bad. Thus, the probability for the success of each mutation is assumed to be one out of two, or one-half. Elementary statistical theory shows that the probability of 200 successive mutations being successful is then (½)200, or one chance out of 1060. The number 1060, if written out, would be "one" followed by sixty "zeros." In other words, the chance that a 200-component organism could be formed by mutation and natural selection is less than one chance out of a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion! Lest anyone think that a 200-part system is unreasonably complex, it should be noted that even a one-celled plant or animal may have millions of molecular "parts."

The evolutionist might react by saying that even though any one such mutating organism might not be successful, surely some around the world would be, especially in the 10 billion years (or 1018 seconds) of assumed earth history. Therefore, let us imagine that every one of the earth's 1014 square feet of surface harbors a billion (i.e., 109) mutating systems and that each mutation requires one-half second (actually it would take far more time than this). Each system can thus go through its 200 mutations in 100 seconds and then, if it is unsuccessful, start over for a new try. In 1018 seconds, there can, therefore, be 1018/102, or 1016, trials by each mutating system. Multiplying all these numbers together, there would be a total possible number of attempts to develop a 200-component system equal to 1014 (109) (1016), or 1039 attempts. Since the probability against the success of any one of them is 1060, it is obvious that the probability that just one of these 1039 attempts might be successful is only one out of 1060/1039, or 1021.

All this means that the chance that any kind of a 200-component integrated functioning organism could be developed by mutation and natural selection just once, anywhere in the world, in all the assumed expanse of geologic time, is less than one chance out of a billion trillion. What possible conclusion, therefore, can we derive from such considerations as this except that evolution by mutation and natural selection is mathematically and logically indefensible!

*drops mic again and walks away*

Hmmn interesting

Naijadeyhia vs seun








I love this, our oga seun dey represent.. e too much.



Naijadeyhia u suppose put lalasticlala and mynd44 for hotseat as well

Cutehector:
Naijadeyhia vs seun








I love this, our oga seun dey represent.. e too much.



Naijadeyhia u suppose put lalasticlala and mynd44 for hotseat as well

Naah this wasnt a contest just a knowledge quest. So everything is laid bare for everyone to intelligently peruse and take an informed position for or against. Thats all it is.

I don't knw if it's possible to seek for seun's support to vote for falconey in dis mr nairaland contest. Well, they say, u never can tell, just try.



Seun, I wish to seek for your support to vote falconey for mr nairaland.

Most of his threads have graced the front page, he is intelligent, and a lover of politics section.

I"l be very grateful if my request is granted sir.

Thanks

Ofemmanu1:

Okay, since you insists, i won't pass without dropping a thing for you.
Now, read this up; carefully.
http://www.cco.caltech.edu/~brokawc/Bi11/Organisms.html

http://listverse.com/2011/11/19/8-examples-of-evolution-in-action/

After reading these two links, you should agree with most sane humans that evolution is real and if you still argue bout evolution ever, then i think you should be watered twice daily.

I guess someone will call an operation to become transgender evolution!

The examples on those links don't reflect the Ape to Man theory at all.

@Ogbevireo, there is absolutely NO PLACE or SPACE, in Evolution, that talks about "Apes becoming Humans!!! Where do you people keep getting all this your false information?

"Evolution is not about from breed to breed, it is about going from one breed to another"...................FALSE!!!

Niflheim:
"Evolution is not about from breed to breed, it is about going from one breed to another"...................FALSE!!!

Correction: what I said was, evolution is about a breed evolving into a totally different specie of animal and not a different breed"

If you put that side by side with the law of natural selection and how evolutionists believe man came about then its absolutely correct.

evolution
ˌiːvəˈluːʃ(ə)n,ˈɛv-/
noun

the process by which different kinds of living organism are believed to have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth.
synonyms: Darwinism, natural selection
"early ecologists were not interested in evolution"

@Naijadeyhia,

"What I said was, evolution is about a breed evolving into a totally different specie of animal"..........................................LIKE I SAID BEFORE, THIS INFORMATION IS 100% FALSE!!!

Can I ask you a question?...........................WHERE "THE HELL" DID YOU GET THIS INFORMATION FROM?!!!

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia,

"What I said was, evolution is about a breed evolving into a totally different specie of animal"..........................................LIKE I SAID BEFORE, THIS INFORMATION IS 100% FALSE!!!

Can I ask you a question?...........................WHERE "THE HELL" DID YOU GET THIS INFORMATION FROM?!!!

If I am wrong then pray define evolution and explain it.

@Naijadeyhia,

Human beings have toes(bottom) and fingers at the end of their shoulders!!!...............................HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A BIRD WITH FINGERS?(and claws at the end of those fingers)?

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A BIRD WITH CLAWS AND FINGERS DIRECTLY UNDER IT'S WINGS?!!!

ANSWER 'YES' OR 'NO'?

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia,

Human beings have toes(bottom) and fingers at the end of their shoulders!!!...............................HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A BIRD WITH FINGERS?(and claws at the end of those fingers)?

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A BIRD WITH CLAWS AND FINGERS DIRECTLY UNDER IT'S WINGS?!!!

ANSWER 'YES' OR 'NO'?

You just nailed yourself.

If evolution means over millions of years via micro or macro evolution we came from a single celled organism into whom we are today is it not sensible to say that we should still be able to see some organism or animal in a certain stage of evolution today?

This is why I asked. All over the world all men are standing upright. Be they pygmies or giants they are all standing upright. How come we have no living neanderthal? Did we all evolve at the same time and at the same rate? Even that is an impossibility.

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia,

Human beings have toes(bottom) and fingers at the end of their shoulders!!!...............................HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A BIRD WITH FINGERS?(and claws at the end of those fingers)?

HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A BIRD WITH CLAWS AND FINGERS DIRECTLY UNDER IT'S WINGS?!!!

ANSWER 'YES' OR 'NO'?

As an addition to my response let me add. Now this is very simple so you must understand it.

If it took me a thousand years to develop fingers and then I had to learn to adapt to that change first before moving on to the next stage of evolution and then it took me another million years to develop the kind of lungs I have today then that development gap of a million years is the issue.

There should be today someone or something still in that development gap and not fully evolved yet. Where are they?

@Naijadeyhia,

EVOLUTION OF ELEPHANTS AND MAMMOTHS:
1.They elephants have a chromosome count of 56, while mammoths have a chromosome count of 58.

2.The elephants and mammoths have a similar skeletal structure.

3.Elephants and mammoths have similar external features(2 tusks,1 trunk, big fat legs, thin small tail).

4. The differences are in size and amount of body hair.

WRONG DEFINITION:
I am looking for an elephant that will turn into a butterfly.

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia,

EVOLUTION OF ELEPHANTS AND MAMMOTHS:
1.They elephants have a chromosome count of 56, while mammoths have a chromosome count of 58.

2.The elephants and mammoths have a similar skeletal structure.

3.Elephants and mammoths have similar external features(2 tusks,1 trunk, big fat legs, thin small tail).

4. The differences are in size and amount of body hair.

WRONG DEFINITION:
I am looking for an elephant that will turn into a butterfly.

You still do not get it do you? Evolution isnt instantaneous and I wasnt saying it was. My inference is a simple one. If evolution took millions of years to perfect where are the imperfect species yet evolving today?

Did all birds and fish and cats and dogs and people somehow evolve simultaneously with no evolution gap in any specie?

"You just nailed yourself".................................This is proof that you STILL do not understand Evolution!!!

I asked you a question, the answer I was expecting was a "YES" or a "NO"................................The answer that I got from you is:" You just nailed yourself"

P.S.: Anyone who "thinks" that Evolution is about a monkey turning into a bat.......................HAS LITERALLY CRUCIFIED HIMSELF!!!

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia,

EVOLUTION OF ELEPHANTS AND MAMMOTHS:
1.They elephants have a chromosome count of 56, while mammoths have a chromosome count of 58.

2.The elephants and mammoths have a similar skeletal structure.

3.Elephants and mammoths have similar external features(2 tusks,1 trunk, big fat legs, thin small tail).

4. The differences are in size and amount of body hair.

WRONG DEFINITION:
I am looking for an elephant that will turn into a butterfly.

What you have are always supposedly dead samples of mammoth but no sample of what that mammoth itself evolved from?

You see to make the evolution theory plausible if you say an elephant evolved from a mammoth what then did the mammoth evolve from especially since thd mammoth was bigger and more intimidating than the elephant so why would it downgrade to an elephant which is smaller.

What did the mammoth evolve from?

Answer "YES" or "NO"!!! Have you seen a bird with claws under it's wings?(The equivalent of a human hand).

Niflheim:
"You just nailed yourself".................................This is proof that you STILL do not understand Evolution!!!

I asked you a question, the answer I was expecting was a "YES" or a "NO"................................The answer that I got from you is:" You just nailed yourself"

P.S.: Anyone who "thinks" that Evolution is about a monkey turning into a bat.......................HAS LITERALLY CRUCIFIED HIMSELF!!!

Then what is evolution all about?
And yet, bear in mind that we should at least be seeing something evolving now, which might evolved fully in the future, maybe we can know.
Thanks, bro.

naijadeyhia:


What you have are always supposedly dead samples of mammoth but no sample of what that mammoth itself evolved from?

You see to make the evolution theory plausible if you say an elephant evolved from a mammoth what then did the mammoth evolve from especially since thd mammoth was bigger and more intimidating than the elephant so why would it downgrade to an elephant which is smaller.

What did the mammoth evolve from?

Nifilheim.

@Naijadeyhia

Bros I take god/devil/mother nature beg you................WHERE OR WHEN DID I SAY THAT ELEPHANTS EVOLVED FROM MAMMOTHS?!!! HABA!!! THOSE THINGS I LISTED THERE, FROM NUMBERS 1 TO 4 WERE THE PROOFS OF ELEPHANTS AND MAMMOTHS SHARING A COMMON ANCESTOR!!!

Niflheim:
"You just nailed yourself".................................This is proof that you STILL do not understand Evolution!!!

I asked you a question, the answer I was expecting was a "YES" or a "NO"................................The answer that I got from you is:" You just nailed yourself"

P.S.: Anyone who "thinks" that Evolution is about a monkey turning into a bat.......................HAS LITERALLY CRUCIFIED HIMSELF!!!

Let me help you with your theory so you will see how ridiculous it sounds.

Scientists say all life began from one single celled organism right?

How did that single cell able to perfectly evolve to different fish, birds, horses and even man without us somehow having a horseman or a dogfish but every creature has in perfection exactly what it needs to survive and live here on earth.

This was why I took time out to give you the statistical impossibility of that in an earlier post.

Lets put it this way;

If you take all seven rainbow colours of paint and seven different people all poured it at the same time into the air and it lands on the ground at the same time or even one after the other what is the possibility of all of them creating the mona lisa?


Lets see another scenario shall we?

If you put a nail on the ground with the sharp point facing upwards and you have a hundred coins and you either throw these coins individually or at the same time with the aim of having at least one balancing on that nail perfectly. How long do you think you would throw these coins to have that result? Is it possible?

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia

Bros I take god/devil/mother nature beg you................WHERE OR WHEN DID I SAY THAT ELEPHANTS EVOLVED FROM MAMMOTHS?!!! HABA!!! THOSE THINGS I LISTED THERE, FROM NUMBERS 1 TO 4 WERE THE PROOFS OF ELEPHANTS AND MAMMOTHS SHARING A COMMON ANCESTOR!!!

So if elephants and mammoths shared a common ancestor what or where is the proof of that ancestor?

larabae13:
Hmmn interesting

You feeling it?

Niflheim:
@Naijadeyhia

Bros I take god/devil/mother nature beg you................WHERE OR WHEN DID I SAY THAT ELEPHANTS EVOLVED FROM MAMMOTHS?!!! HABA!!! THOSE THINGS I LISTED THERE, FROM NUMBERS 1 TO 4 WERE THE PROOFS OF ELEPHANTS AND MAMMOTHS SHARING A COMMON ANCESTOR!!!

You need to grasp the basics of evolution first ro understand what I am saying.

A mamoth allegedly existed before the elephant did so where are the evolving ancestral mammoth origin?

naijadeyhia:



So if elephants and mammoths shared a common ancestor what or where is the proof of that ancestor?

I've sent you a pm, bro.

tempem:

I've sent you a pm, bro.

I already responded.

EVOLUTION OF HUMANS AND APES:
1.Humans have a chromosome count of 46, while apes have a chromosome count of 48!!!

2.The humans and apes have very near-identical skeletal structures!!!(including the coccyx, which is the tail bone, present in both humans and apes)

3.The humans and apes have similar external features(5 fingers, 5 toes, walking upright on 2 feet, babies develop lanugo hair in the womb at week 16 of the pregnancy and it disappears at around week 36)!!!

4.Major difference is the amount of body hair and size!!!

FINAL SUBMISSION: If you agree that mammoths and elephants are related(through common ancestry), BUT ARE FINDING IT DIFFICULT TO FATHOM THE IDEA THAT HUMANS AND APES SHARE A COMMON ANCESTOR, THEN THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING I CAN DO FOR YOU HERE!!!

naijadeyhia:


You just nailed yourself.

If evolution means over millions of years via micro or macro evolution we came from a single celled organism into whom we are today is it not sensible to say that we should still be able to see some organism or animal in a certain stage of evolution today?

This is why I asked. All over the world all men are standing upright. Be they pygmies or giants they are all standing upright. How come we have no living neanderthal? Did we all evolve at the same time and at the same rate? Even that is an impossibility.

Actually, Neanderthals were killed off and wiped from the face of the earth by a combination of badluck and our ancestors.

There is some neanderthal DNA found in places like Southeast Asia.

What an interesting thread. Very educative and enlightening. Following.....