Profile
Channel Views:
2,195
Total Upload Views:
0
Joined:
Mar 11, 2009
Latest Activity:
Mar 11, 2009
Subscribers:
14
About Me:
All intelligently designed systems have fixed elements/immutable laws that are needed for system stability and that if changed, will cause the system to become unstable and crash. Every engineer and PC programmer understands the need for fixed elements in their intelligently designed systems. Very few engineers (that also understand biological systems) believe in Darwinian evolution because they understand it is impossible to change an element that needs to remain fixed for the system to remain stable, without crashing the system. Stable accurate repetition can never take place without fixed, (unable to evolve) functional elements firmly established.
The universe has these fixed elements with the 34 constants. If these 34 finely tuned parameters were to change (evolve) the system would become unstable and life would cease to exist. Moreover the genome is filled with very precise fixed (a.k.a. conserved) elements, that if changed, will cause the organism serious problems. We know of the 50 billion proteins (and counting) in life, they all have highly precise parameters for proper folding & function. If these precise parameters are changed proper protein function will cease and problems soon arise in the organism. The fatal dilemma for Darwinian evolution is, all parts of the genome must evolve, thus precise fixed elements are impossible to establish
Medical science has established many diseases are a result of improper protein folding . Each species has its own parameters for protein folding and protein function.
"Eighty percent of proteins are different between humans and chimpanzees" Glazko G, Veeramachaneni V, Nei M, Makałowski W.
So even though the primary structure of the protein coding sequences in DNA between humans & chimps have only a 1-3 % difference, 80% of the tertiary structure of those same proteins are different.
For a chimp to evolve into a human, he must slowly change the parameters of 80% of the tertiary structure his proteins. This means he must also change the shape/functionality information system involved in protein function. This transition in protein shape & functionality is never observed.
All species have an remarkable array of error correction mechanisms that "spend an enormous amount of resources preventing changes" (as said by James Shapiro). Many diseases are now known to be a result of faulty error correction mechanisms that allow proteins to mis-fold. Yet it works remarkably well preventing changes evident in stasis and living fossils throughout the entire fossil record and conserved elements in DNA & RNA . All species will have their own separate and distinct error correction mechanisms to prevent mis-folding and the many systems of homeostasis.
Evolution must explain how the many separate and distinct error correction mechanisms can simultaneously evolve with the changing new proteins and homeostasis systems as a species evolves. This transition is never observed. Any error correction mechanism that would allow such massive changes to the protein folds amounts to no error correction mechanisms at all.
"Large numbers of sequence elements have been identified to be highly conserved among vertebrate genomes. These highly conserved elements (HCEs) are often located in or around genes that are involved in transcription regulation and early development....Through the comparison of human and rodent genomes, more than 5,000 ultraconserved elements (UCEs) with 100 percent identity were found [1]. Hundreds of highly conserved non-coding elements (CNEs, UCRs) were also reported through long distance searching in the human and pufferfish genomes"
"There are millions of highly conserved sequences presumably under selection for biological function" (Dermitzakis et al. 2002; Boffelli et al. 2003; Margulies et al. 2003; Siepel et al. 2005)
All species have ultra conserved elements (UCE) in their DNA & RNA. The UCE are the fixed functional elements that are needed to keep the system stable. UCE are death nails in evolutionary theory because any DNA sequence that is not subject to the mechanisms proposed for DNA sequence change has no natural way to get arranged into that sequence in the first place. The theory must provide the mechanisms for change in the UCE and then provide the mechanisms for the UCE to be frozen (as luck would have it) in a functional state. No such mechanisms can be demonstrated.
The functional UCE in all species have falsified Darwinian evolution, and science has yet to understand this.
"These ultra-conserved elements are long, they evolved rather rapidly, and they are now evolutionarily frozen. We don't know of a biomolecular mechanism that would explain them," Professor David Haussler
"From the data available at this time, it would seem that protein structure has been much more conserved during evolution than genetically based amino acid sequences," Chemist Sung-Hou Kim, Berkeley
Country:
United States
Interests:
Systematic Dismantling Of Darwinian Evolution
Recent Activity
There hasn't been any recent activity.
Subscribers
(16)
Subscriptions
(46)
Channel Comments
When some of the links in the Channel Comments are copied they paste with extra "&" symbols that loads a "website can't be found" page. Maybe someone can explain why.
"Stratigraphic distribution of vertebrate fossil footprints compared with body fossils," L. Brand and J. Florence, Origins 9 (1982): 67-74
"We would expect that fossil layers containing footprints of an animal would also contain the fossils of the animals themselves. However, this is not always the case. Bird and mammal footprints and fossils occur mostly in the same layer. Amphibian and reptile fossils, however, don't match up with the footprints. For example, there are very few reptile footprints and no amphibian prints in the Cretaceous layer. The only reptile prints are from dinosaurs. However, amphibians and reptile body fossils are extremely abundant in the Cretaceous layer
A species body and footprint fossils existing in two different strata layers is evidence strata layers do not need millions of years to be laid down. And the strata layer is not indicative of the time of origins, therefor can not be used as evidence for evolution
"Is gene duplication a viable explanation for the origination of biological information and complexity?" Complexity Volume 16, Issue 6, pages 17--31, July/August 2011
"All life depends on the biological information encoded in DNA with which to synthesize and regulate various peptide sequences required by an organism's cells......The totality of the evidence reveals that, although duplication can and does facilitate important adaptations by tinkering with existing compounds, molecular evolution is nonetheless constrained in each and every case. Therefore, although the process of gene duplication and subsequent random mutation has certainly contributed to the size and diversity of the genome, it is alone insufficient in explaining the origination of the highly complex information pertinent to the essential functioning of living organisms"
Horizontal gene transfer: A critical view
"It has been suggested that horizontal gene transfer (HGT) is the "essence of phylogeny." In contrast, much data suggest that this is an exaggeration resulting in part from a reliance on inadequate methods to identify HGT events. In addition, the assumption that HGT is a ubiquitous influence throughout evolution is questionable. Instead, rampant global HGT is likely to have been relevant only to primitive genomes. In modern organisms we suggest that both the range and frequencies of HGT are constrained most often by selective barriers. As a consequence those HGT events that do occur most often have little influence on genome phylogeny. Although HGT does occur with important evolutionary consequences, classical Darwinian lineages seem to be the dominant mode of evolution for modern organisms"
(Washington Post, April 20, 1992, p.A3)
Molecular clock debate: Time dependency of molecular rate estimates for mtDNA: this is not the time for wishful thinking
"For more than a decade, Dr Bandelt has been wholehearted in his efforts to simplify mtDNA evolution and, especially, to champion the use of simple mtDNA clocks. It is our contrary view, based both on our research and that of many other groups, that mtDNA evolution is not clock-like and that the evidence for time-dependent rates should not be dismissed. When it comes to mtDNA, one should not use a sundial as a stopwatch"
"It is worth noting at this point that a three- to fourfold pedigree/phylogenetic discrepancy has been observed for rate estimates of the Y chromosome microsatellite sequences (Zhivotovsky et al., 2006)"
"Yearbook of Pediatric Endocrinology 2005" The Year in Science and Medicine
Hochberg, Z. Carel, J.-C.
"..The existence of such a [MRCA] should not surprise: the growth in the population of our ancestors is close to exponential as we trace them back in time.....For the present human population of size 6 billion, it would be 33 generations, corresponding to 800 years. This is surprisingly recent. And an even more surprising conclusion from such models is that, only a little farther back in time , a large fraction of the population will be the ancestors of everybody alive today....In several sets of estimates, the mean time back to the universal ancestor is 2,300--5,000 years. Interestingly, the Jewish calendar counts now 5,765 years since the Creation..."
"Modelling the recent common ancestry of all living humans" Douglas L. T. Rohde
"If a common ancestor of all living humans is defined as an individual who is a genealogical ancestor of all present-day people, the most recent common ancestor (MRCA) for a randomly mating population would have lived in the very recent past...Here we show that recent common ancestors also emerge from two models...These analyses suggest that the genealogies of all living humans overlap in remarkable ways in the recent past. In particular, the MRCA of all present-day humans lived just A FEW [3000] THOUSAND YEARS AGO in these models. Moreover, among all individuals living more than just a few thousand years earlier than the MRCA, EACH PRESENT DAY HUMAN HAS EXACTLY THE SAME SET OF GENEALOGICAL ANCESTORS"
"Recent common ancestors of all present-day individuals" Advances in Applied Probability, 31: 1002-1026
"Family tree shows our common ancestor lived just 3,500 years ago" Michael Hopkin
"The most recent common ancestor of all humanity lived just a few thousand years ago, according to a computer model of our family tree. Researchers have calculated that the mystery person, from whom everyone alive today is directly descended, probably lived around 1,500 BC in eastern Asia"
"Besides dating our most recent common ancestor, Rohde's team also calculates that in 5,400 BC everyone alive was either an ancestor of all of humanity, or of nobody alive today. The researchers call this the 'identical ancestors' point: the time before which all the family trees of people today are composed of exactly the same individuals"