• 

  Cadillac ATS Vs. The Guoliang Tunnel

  96,187 Views

  By metaops

  Promoted

"Charles Darwin said (paraphrase), 'If anyone could find anything that could not be had through a number of slight, successive, modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.' Well that condition has been met time and time again. Basically every gene, every protein fold. There is nothing of significance that we can show that can be had in a gradualist way. It's a mirage. None of it happens that way. - Doug Axe PhD.

Experimental Evolution in Fruit Flies - October 2010
Excerpt: "This research really upends the dominant paradigm about how species evolve".,,, as stated in regards to the 35 year experimental failure to fixate a single beneficial mutation within fruit flies.
http://www.arn.org/blogs/index.php/literature/2010/10/07/experimental_evolution_in_fruit_flies

Waiting Longer for Two Mutations - Michael J. Behe
Excerpt: Citing malaria literature sources (White 2004) I had noted that the de novo appearance of chloroquine resistance in Plasmodium falciparum was an event of probability of 1 in 10^20. I then wrote that ‘‘for humans to achieve a mutation like this by chance, we would have to wait 100 million times 10 million years’’ (Behe 2007) (because that is the extrapolated time that it would take to produce 10^20 humans). Durrett and Schmidt (2008, p. 1507) retort that my number ‘‘is 5 million times larger than the calculation we have just given’’ using their model (which nonetheless "using their model" gives a prohibitively long waiting time of 216 million years). Their criticism compares apples to oranges. My figure of 10^20 is an empirical statistic from the literature; it is not, as their calculation is, a theoretical estimate from a population genetics model.
http://www.discovery.org/a/9461

Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds: Doug Axe:
Excerpt: Starting with a weakly functional sequence carrying this signature, clusters of ten side-chains within the fold are replaced randomly, within the boundaries of the signature, and tested for function. The prevalence of low-level function in four such experiments indicates that roughly one in 10^64 signature-consistent sequences forms a working domain. Combined with the estimated prevalence of plausible hydropathic patterns (for any fold) and of relevant folds for particular functions, this implies the overall prevalence of sequences performing a specific function by any domain-sized fold may be as low as 1 in 10^77, adding to the body of evidence that functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15321723

Evolution vs. Functional Proteins - Doug Axe - Video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4018222

Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4050681

This following video is a bit more clear for explaining exactly why mutations to the DNA do not control Body Plan morphogenesis, since the mutations are the ‘bottom rung of the ladder’ as far as the 'higher levels of the layered information’ of the cell are concerned:

Stephen Meyer on Craig Venter, Complexity Of The Cell & Layered Information
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4798685

"The evidence for the adaptive divergence of gene switches is still thin. The best case involves the loss of protective armor and spines in sticklebacks, both due to changes in regulatory elements. But these elements represent the loss of traits, rather than the origin of evolutionary novelties...We now know that Hox genes and other transcription factors have many roles besides inducing body pattern, and their overall function in development - let alone in evolution - remains murky."
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/06/scott_f_gilbert_developmental035931.html

Here is a more thorough critique of evo-devo:

Nature's "Gems": Microevolution Meets Microevolution - Casey Luskin - August 2010
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2010/08/nature_gems_microevolution_mee037171.html#more

Cortical Inheritance: The Crushing Critique Against Genetic Reductionism - Arthur Jones - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4187488

Astonishingly, actual motors, which far surpass man-made motors in 'engineering parameters', are now being found inside 'simple cells'.

Articles and Videos on Molecular Motors
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMzlkNjYydmRkZw&hl=en

Michael Behe - Life Reeks Of Design - 2010 - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5066181

And in spite of the fact of finding molecular motors permeating the simplest of bacterial life, there are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of even one such motor or system.

"There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system only a variety of wishful speculations. It is remarkable that Darwinism is accepted as a satisfactory explanation of such a vast subject."
James Shapiro - Molecular Biologist

The following expert doesn't even hide his very unscientific preconceived philosophical bias against intelligent design,,,

‘We should reject, as a matter of principle, the substitution of intelligent design for the dialogue of chance and necessity,,,

Yet at the same time the same expert readily admits that neo-Darwinism has ZERO evidence for the chance and necessity of material processes producing any cellular system whatsoever,,,

,,,we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.’
Franklin M. Harold,* 2001. The way of the cell: molecules, organisms and the order of life, Oxford University Press, New York, p. 205.
Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry, Colorado State University, USA

Michael Behe - No Scientific Literature For Evolution of Any Irreducibly Complex Molecular Machines
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5302950/

“The response I have received from repeating Behe's claim about the evolutionary literature, which simply brings out the point being made implicitly by many others, such as Chris Dutton and so on, is that I obviously have not read the right books. There are, I am sure, evolutionists who have described how the transitions in question could have occurred.” And he continues, “When I ask in which books I can find these discussions, however, I either get no answer or else some titles that, upon examination, do not, in fact, contain the promised accounts. That such accounts exist seems to be something that is widely known, but I have yet to encounter anyone who knows where they exist.”
David Ray Griffin - retired professor of philosophy of religion and theology

Poly-Functional Complexity equals Poly-Constrained Complexity
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMjdoZmd2emZncQ

DNA - Evolution Vs. Polyfuctionality - video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4614519

Bio-Complexity
http://bio-complexity.org/ojs/index.php/main/issue/view/24

Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis
http://lettherebelight-77.blogspot.com/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html