Results for: whale-evolution Search Results
Family Filter:
6:54
Dr. David Berlinski: What Does It Take for Change? (Clip 5) *******www.youtube****/watch?v=DRqdvhL3pgM Richard Sternberg and Steven Meyer - On Whale Evolution - audio *******www.youtube****/watch?v=lCsmeSL-9RY Part 2 *******www.youtube****/watch?v=jRV8_L8Lmzg Whales Designed or Evolved? Marc Surtees video *******edinburghcreationgroup****/whales.xml In A Whale of Trouble *******www.scienceagainstevolution****/v3i11f.htm Whale Tale Two Excerpt: We think that the most logical interpretation of the Pakicetus fossils are that they represent land-dwelling mammals that didnt even have teeth or ears in common with modern whales. This actually pulls the whale evolution tree out by the roots. Evolutionists are back to the point of not having any clue as to how land mammals could possibly have evolved into whales. *******www.scienceagainstevolution****/v6i2f.htm#new For Complete Video by Dr. Terry Mortenson please see: *******video.google****/videoplay?docid=2278048305135275986&ei=o5_wSvqlLIvGqwLbvcDSCQ&q=origin+of+species&hl=en# Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
16 Jan 2010
2361
Share Video

10:00
Richard Sternberg's website: *******www.richardsternberg****/ Waiting Longer for Two Mutations, Part 5 - Michael Behe Excerpt: the appearance of a particular (beneficial) double mutation in humans would have an expected time of appearance of 216 million years, *******behe.uncommondescent****/2009/03/waiting-longer-for-two-mutations-part-5/ Whale Evolution? - Exposing The Deception - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4032568/whale_evolution_exposing_the_deception_in_the_fossil_record_dr_terry_mortenson/ Whale Tale Two Excerpt: We think that the most logical interpretation of the Pakicetus fossils are that they represent land-dwelling mammals that didn’t even have teeth or ears in common with modern whales. This actually pulls the whale evolution tree out by the roots. Evolutionists are back to the point of not having any clue as to how land mammals could possibly have evolved into whales. *******www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v6i2f.htm What Does It take To Change A Cow Into A Whale - David Berlinski - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=DRqdvhL3pgM Chimpanzee? 10-10-2008 - Dr Richard Buggs - research geneticist at the University of Florida ...Therefore the total similarity of the genomes could be below 70%. *******www.refdag.nl/artikel/1366432/Chimpanzee.html 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. *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15321723 Evolution vs. Functional Proteins - Doug Axe - Video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4018222/evolution_vs_functional_proteins_where_did_the_information_come_from_doug_axe_stephen_meyer/ Chimps are not like humans - May 2004 Excerpt: the International Chimpanzee Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22 proteins are different from their human counterparts,,, The results reported this week showed that "83% of the genes have changed between the human and the chimpanzee—only 17% are identical—so that means that the impression that comes from the 1.2% [sequence] difference is [misleading]. In the case of protein structures, it has a big effect," Sakaki said. *******cmbi.bjmu.edu.cn/news/0405/119.htm Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees; Gene; Volume 346, 14 February 2005: *******www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15716009 Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681/stephen_meyer_functional_proteins_and_information_for_body_plans/ The Paradox of the "Ancient" Bacterium Which Contains "Modern" Protein-Coding Genes: “Almost without exception, bacteria isolated from ancient material have proven to closely resemble modern bacteria at both morphological and molecular levels.” Heather Maughan*, C. William Birky Jr., Wayne L. Nicholson, William D. Rosenzweig§ and Russell H. Vreeland ; *******mbe.oxfordjournals****/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 Mutation Studies, Videos, And Quotes *******docs.google****/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMjZjZnM5M21mZg Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues: Michael J. Behe and David W. Snoke Excerpt: We conclude that, in general, to be fixed in 10^8 generations, the production of novel protein features that require the participation of two or more amino acid residues simply by multiple point mutations in duplicated genes would entail population sizes of no less than 10^9.,,,The fact that very large population sizes—10^9 or greater—are required to build even a minimal [multi-residue] feature requiring two nucleotide alterations within 10^8 generations by the processes described in our model, and that enormous population sizes are required for more complex features or shorter times, seems to indicate that the mechanism of gene duplication and point mutation alone would be ineffective, at least for multicellular diploid species, because few multicellular species reach the required population sizes. *******www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2286568 Evolution Cartoon - Waiting For That Beneficial Mutation - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=71-QYtxi8Bw Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/
3 May 2010
25970
Share Video

9:57
This following video is very good, for it uses the mathematical equations used by leading evolutionists themselves, for population genetics, to show that the evolution of whales is impossible even by their own methods of predicting change: Whale Evolution Vs. Population Genetics - Richard Sternberg PhD. in Evolutionary Biology - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4165203 Perhaps one of the most egregious violations to common sense, by the evolutionists, is the evolutionists claim that whales evolved from a terrestrial (land dwelling) mammal in a mere 10 million years. These following videos and articles expose a few of their violations of logic: Whale Evolution? - Exposing The Deception - Dr. Terry Mortenson - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4032568 This following study provides solid support for Dr. Terry Mortenson's critique in the preceding video: How Whales Have (NOT) Changed Over 35 Million Years – May 2010 Excerpt: We could have found that the main whale lineages over time each experimented with being large, small and medium-sized and that all the dietary forms appeared throughout their evolution, or that whales started out medium-sized and the largest and smallest ones appeared more recently—but the data show none of that. Instead, we find that the differences today were apparent very early on. *******www.uncommondescent****/education/beacon-comes-home-with-the-bacon/#comment-356170 This following sites is a bit more detailed in their dismantling of the whale evolution myth: Whale Tale Two Excerpt: We think that the most logical interpretation of the Pakicetus fossils are that they represent land-dwelling mammals that didn’t even have teeth or ears in common with modern whales. This actually pulls the whale evolution tree out by the roots. Evolutionists are back to the point of not having any clue as to how land mammals could possibly have evolved into whales. *******www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v6i2f.htm "Whales have a long generation time, and they don't have huge populations. They're like the worst-case scenario for trying to evolve structures rapidly," "To fix all the mutations needed to convert a little land mammal into a fully functional whale [in ten million years]--mathematically that's totally not possible." Casey Luskin *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/11/6_bones_of_contention_with_nat.html#more Whale Evolution? Darwinist 'Trawlers' Have Every Reason To Be Concerned: Excerpt: As one review noted: "The anatomical structure, biological function, and way of life of whales are so distinctly different from those of terrestrial mammals that they cannot possibly have evolved from the latter by small genetic changes; aquatics require the simultaneous presence of all their complex features to survive." *******www.arn****/blogs/index.php/2/2009/12/29/whale_evolution_darwinist_trawlers_have This following video takes a honest look at just what evolutionists are up against to satisfactorily explain whale evolution: What Does It take To Change A Cow Into A Whale - David Berlinski - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=DRqdvhL3pgM 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. *******www.discovery****/a/9461 Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681 The Case Against a Darwinian Origin of Protein Folds - Douglas Axe - 2010 Excerpt Pg. 11: "Based on analysis of the genomes of 447 bacterial species, the projected number of different domain structures per species averages 991. Comparing this to the number of pathways by which metabolic processes are carried out, which is around 263 for E. coli, provides a rough figure of three or four new domain folds being needed, on average, for every new metabolic pathway. In order to accomplish this successfully, an evolutionary search would need to be capable of locating sequences that amount to anything from one in 10^159 to one in 10^308 possibilities, something the neo-Darwinian model falls short of by a very wide margin." *******bio-complexity****/ojs/index.php/main/article/view/BIO-C.2010.1 The Case Against a Darwinian Origin of Protein Folds - Douglas Axe, Jay Richards - audio *******intelligentdesign.podomatic****/player/web/2010-05-03T11_09_03-07_00 Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html
28 Sep 2010
3292
Share Video

4:54
Whale sounds The ability to produce and perceive sound is important for whales – to navigate, find food, and communicate. Toothed whales can use echolocation to hunt their prey. They send out high frequency clicks then listen for their echo as they bounce back from objects – like the next meal! Baleen whales use low frequency sound to communicate, sometimes over considerable distances. Recent research suggests that they do this with their larynx – the ‘voice box’ in land mammals. Some baleen whales, such as male humpbacks, produce extremely complex ‘songs’. *******collections.tepapa.govt.nz/exhibitions/whales/Segment.aspx?irn=163 Whale Evolution Vs. Population Genetics - Richard Sternberg PhD. in Evolutionary Biology - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4165203 Convergence Drives Evolution Batty - Fazale Rana - September 2010 Excerpt: The multiple, independent origin of echolocation in these animals (twice in bats and once in toothed whales) exemplifies convergence,,, When examined from an evolutionary perspective, convergence doesn’t make much sense.,,, the latest research demonstrates that—again, from an evolutionary perspective—the genetic and biochemical changes that account for the emergence of echolocation in bats and dolphins is identical. Given the random nature of the evolutionary process, this recent discovery doesn’t match what evolutionary biologists would expect to find. But both the discovery and convergence make sense if life stems from the work of a Creator. *******www.reasons****/convergence-drives-evolution-batty Lenski's Citrate E-Coli - Disproof of Convergent Evolution - Fazale Rana - video (the disproof of convergence starts at the 2:45 minute mark of the video) *******www.metacafe****/watch/4564682 The Long Term Evolution Experiment - Analysis Excerpt: The experiment just goes to show that even with historical contingency and extreme selection pressure, the probability of random mutations causing even a tiny evolutionary improvement in digestion is, in the words of the researchers who did the experiment, “extremely low.” Therefore, it can’t be the explanation for the origin and varieity of all the forms of life on Earth. *******www.scienceagainstevolution****/v12i11f.htm Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4050681 Getting Over the Code Delusion (Epigenetics) - Talbot - November 2010 - Excellent Article for explaining exactly why epigentics falsifies the neo-Darwinian paradigm of genetic reductionism: *******www.thenewatlantis****/publications/getting-over-the-code-delusion Hopeful monsters,' transposons, and the Metazoan radiation: Excerpt: Viable mutations with major morphological or physiological effects are exceedingly rare and usually infertile; the chance of two identical rare mutant individuals arising in sufficient propinquity to produce offspring seems too small to consider as a significant evolutionary event. These problems of viable "hopeful monsters" render these explanations untenable. Paleobiologists Douglas Erwin and James Valentine Widespread ORFan Genes Challenge Common Descent – Paul Nelson – video with references *******www.vimeo****/17135166 How Whales Have (NOT) Changed Over 35 Million Years – May 2010 Excerpt: We could have found that the main whale lineages over time each experimented with being large, small and medium-sized and that all the dietary forms appeared throughout their evolution, or that whales started out medium-sized and the largest and smallest ones appeared more recently—but the data show none of that. Instead, we find that the differences today were apparent very early on. *******www.uncommondescent****/education/beacon-comes-home-with-the-bacon/#comment-356170 Whale Evolution? - Exposing The Deception - Dr. Terry Mortenson - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4032568 Of Whale and Feather Evolution: Nature's Two Macroevolutionary Lumps of Coal (Dismantling Nature's evolutionary evangelism packet) - Casey Luskin _ November 2010 *******www.evolutionnews****/2010/08/of_whale_and_feather_evolution037221.html This article shows how misleading Darwinists can be with the 'whale' evidence: Meet Pakicetus, the Terrestrial Mammal BioLogos Calls a "Whale" - November 2010 *******www.evolutionnews****/2010/11/meet_pakicetus_the_terrestrial039851.html Whale Tale Two Excerpt: We think that the most logical interpretation of the Pakicetus fossils are that they represent land-dwelling mammals that didn’t even have teeth or ears in common with modern whales. This actually pulls the whale evolution tree out by the roots. Evolutionists are back to the point of not having any clue as to how land mammals could possibly have evolved into whales. *******www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/v6i2f.htm Whale Evolution? Darwinist 'Trawlers' Have Every Reason To Be Concerned: Excerpt: As one review noted: "The anatomical structure, biological function, and way of life of whales are so distinctly different from those of terrestrial mammals that they cannot possibly have evolved from the latter by small genetic changes; aquatics require the simultaneous presence of all their complex features to survive." *******www.arn****/blogs/index.php/2/2009/12/29/whale_evolution_darwinist_trawlers_have What Does It take To Change A Cow Into A Whale - David Berlinski - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=DRqdvhL3pgM It seems the entire argument for inferring the supposed fossil sequence for whale evolution, in the fossil record, is primarily based on the erroneous readings of 'bone homology', or bone similarity, between different species. Yet this entire line of reasoning, for establishing scientific certainty for any proposed evolutionary sequence of fossils, is anything but 'certain', as this following video and quote clearly point out: Investigating Evolution: Homology - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=XgXT9sU6y18 If you want to make evolutionist Henry Gee mad at you remind him that he once wrote this following 'true' statement: “To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis that can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity as a bedtime story, amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.” Evolutionist - Henry Gee, editor of Nature, on the feasibility of reconstructing phylogenetic trees from fossils Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html
7 Dec 2010
21620
Share Video

13:57
Cows to Whales - *******www.warneveryone****/whale.htm A whale of a tale - *******www.warneveryone****/whale.htm Scientific Roadblocks to Whale Evolution - *******www.icr****/article/433 . Running Counter to Evolution - *******www.icr****/article/125 . Quotes by Evolutionary Scientists Against Evolution - *******www.warneveryone****/evolution_scientists_quotes.htm Live broadcasting with instant message - *******www.justin.tv/warneveryone KJV1611 Bible - *******www.youtube****/results?search_query=authorizedversion&search=Search
30 Mar 2009
479
Share Video

8:00
Entire video: *******www.mefeedia****/watch/32748037 Bacterial Flagellum - A Sheer Wonder Of Intelligent Design - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/3994630 Michael Behe on Falsifying Intelligent Design - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=N8jXXJN4o_A 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 *******docs.google****/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMzlkNjYydmRkZw&hl=en "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 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 Michael Behe - Life Reeks Of Design - 2010 - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/5066181 William Dembski PhD., and Robert Marks PhD., website with peer reviewed 'Conservation Of Information' Papers (caution heavy math): *******www.evoinfo****/ Dr. Behe states in The Edge of Evolution on page 135: "Generating a single new cellular protein-protein binding site (in other words, generating a truly beneficial mutational event that would actually explain the generation of the complex molecular machinery we see in life) is of the same order of difficulty or worse than the development of chloroquine resistance in the malarial parasite." That order of difficulty is put at 10^20 replications of the malarial parasite by Dr. Behe. This number comes from direct empirical observation. Richard Dawkins’ The Greatest Show on Earth Shies Away from Intelligent Design but Unwittingly Vindicates Michael Behe - Oct. 2009 Excerpt: The rarity of chloroquine resistance is not in question. In fact, Behe’s statistic that it occurs only once in every 10^20 cases was derived from public health statistical data, published by an authority in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The extreme rareness of chloroquine resistance is not a negotiable data point; it is an observed fact. *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/10/richard_dawkins_the_greatest_s.html 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. *******www.discovery****/a/9461 This following calculation by geneticist John Sanford for 'fixing' a beneficial mutation, or for creating a new gene, in humans, gives equally absurd numbers that once again render the Darwinian scenario of humans evolving from apes completely false: Dr. Sanford calculates it would take 12 million years to “fix” a single base pair mutation into a population. He further calculates that to create a gene with 1000 base pairs, it would take 12 million x 1000 or 12 billion years. This is obviously too slow to support the creation of the human genome containing 3 billion base pairs. *******www.detectingtruth****/?p=66 Whale Evolution Vs. Population Genetics - Richard Sternberg PhD. in Evolutionary Biology - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4165203 An Atheist Interviews Michael Behe About "The Edge Of Evolution" - video *******www.in****/videos/watchvideo-bloggingheads-interview-with-michael-behe-4734623.html Michael Behe's Amazon Blog *******www.amazon****/gp/blog/A3DGRQ0IO7KYQ2/ref=cm_blog_blog/180-3515567-6480413 Michael Behe - bio. and list of peer reviewed papers: *******www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.html Should Intelligent Design Be Taught as Science? Michael Behe debates Stephen Barr - 2010 - video *******www.isi****/lectures/flvplayer/lectureplayer.aspx?file=v000355_cicero_040710.mp4&dir=mp4/lectures Main page - with audio of debate *******www.isi****/lectures/lectures.aspx?SBy=lecture&SFor=18fdfd28-e682-421f-9acf-2940402af8e3 Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) - updated regularly *******www.discovery****/a/2640 Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html Stephen Meyer - Functional Proteins And Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/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 *******www.metacafe****/watch/4798685
7 Oct 2010
1848
Share Video

9:55
Stephen C. Meyer - The Scientific Basis For Intelligent Design - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4104651/ Stephen C. Meyer - Signature In The Cell: "DNA functions like a software program," "We know from experience that software comes from programmers. Information--whether inscribed in hieroglyphics, written in a book or encoded in a radio signal--always arises from an intelligent source. So the discovery of digital code in DNA provides evidence that the information in DNA also had an intelligent source." *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/07/leading_advocate_of_intelligen.html Michael Behe on Falsifying Intelligent Design - video *******www.youtube****/watch?v=N8jXXJN4o_A ,,,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 *******www.metacafe****/watch/5302950/ Astonishingly, actual motors, which far surpass man-made motors in 'engineering parameters', are now being found inside 'simple cells'. Bacterial Flagellum - A Sheer Wonder Of Intelligent Design - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/3994630 Bacterial Flagella: A Paradigm for Design – Scott Minnich – Video *******www.vimeo****/9032112 Articles and Videos on Molecular Motors *******docs.google****/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMzlkNjYydmRkZw&hl=en 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 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 Michael Behe - Life Reeks Of Design - 2010 - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/5066181 William Dembski PhD., and Robert Marks PhD., website with peer reviewed 'Conservation Of Information' Papers (caution heavy math): *******www.evoinfo****/ Dr. Behe states in The Edge of Evolution on page 135: "Generating a single new cellular protein-protein binding site (in other words, generating a truly beneficial mutational event that would actually explain the generation of the complex molecular machinery we see in life) is of the same order of difficulty or worse than the development of chloroquine resistance in the malarial parasite." That order of difficulty is put at 10^20 replications of the malarial parasite by Dr. Behe. This number comes from direct empirical observation. Richard Dawkins’ The Greatest Show on Earth Shies Away from Intelligent Design but Unwittingly Vindicates Michael Behe - Oct. 2009 Excerpt: The rarity of chloroquine resistance is not in question. In fact, Behe’s statistic that it occurs only once in every 10^20 cases was derived from public health statistical data, published by an authority in the Journal of Clinical Investigation. The extreme rareness of chloroquine resistance is not a negotiable data point; it is an observed fact. *******www.evolutionnews****/2009/10/richard_dawkins_the_greatest_s.html 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. *******www.discovery****/a/9461 This following calculation by geneticist John Sanford for 'fixing' a beneficial mutation, or for creating a new gene, in humans, gives equally absurd numbers that once again render the Darwinian scenario of humans evolving from apes completely false: Dr. Sanford calculates it would take 12 million years to “fix” a single base pair mutation into a population. He further calculates that to create a gene with 1000 base pairs, it would take 12 million x 1000 or 12 billion years. This is obviously too slow to support the creation of the human genome containing 3 billion base pairs. *******www.detectingtruth****/?p=66 Whale Evolution Vs. Population Genetics - Richard Sternberg PhD. in Evolutionary Biology - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4165203 Materialists simply do not have the 'beneficial' mutations they need to make evolution work. The following site has numerous quotes, studies and videos which reveal the overwhelmingly negative mutation rate which has been found in life: Mutation Studies, Videos, And Quotes *******docs.google****/Doc?docid=0AYmaSrBPNEmGZGM4ejY3d3pfMjZjZnM5M21mZg An Atheist Interviews Michael Behe About "The Edge Of Evolution" - video *******www.in****/videos/watchvideo-bloggingheads-interview-with-michael-behe-4734623.html Michael Behe's Amazon Blog *******www.amazon****/gp/blog/A3DGRQ0IO7KYQ2/ref=cm_blog_blog/180-3515567-6480413 Michael Behe - bio. and list of peer reviewed papers: *******www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/faculty/behe.html Should Intelligent Design Be Taught as Science? Michael Behe debates Stephen Barr - 2010 - video *******www.isi****/lectures/flvplayer/lectureplayer.aspx?file=v000355_cicero_040710.mp4&dir=mp4/lectures Main page - with audio of debate *******www.isi****/lectures/lectures.aspx?SBy=lecture&SFor=18fdfd28-e682-421f-9acf-2940402af8e3 Peer-Reviewed & Peer-Edited Scientific Publications Supporting the Theory of Intelligent Design (Annotated) - updated regularly *******www.discovery****/a/2640 The DNA Code - Solid Scientific Proof Of Intelligent Design - Perry Marshall - video *******www.metacafe****/watch/4060532/the_dna_code_solid_scientific_proof_of_intelligent_design_perry_marshall/ The current materialistic argument essentially appears to be like this: Premise One: No materialistic cause of specified complex information is known. Conclusion: Therefore, it must arise from some unknown materialistic cause. On the other hand, Stephen Meyer describes the intelligent design argument as follows: “Premise One: Despite a thorough search, no material causes have been discovered that demonstrate the power to produce large amounts of specified information. “Premise Two: Intelligent causes have demonstrated the power to produce large amounts of specified information. “Conclusion: Intelligent design constitutes the best, most causally adequate, explanation for the information in the cell.” Stephen Meyer - Extreme Rarity of Functional Proteins And Higher Level Information For Body Plans - video *******www.metacafe****/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 *******www.metacafe****/watch/4798685 Intelligent Design - The Anthropic Hypothesis *******lettherebelight-77.blogspot****/2009/10/intelligent-design-anthropic-hypothesis_19.html
11 Oct 2010
782
Share Video