Human Genome Project

HUMAN GENOME PROJECT: QUANTITATIVE DISPROOF OF EVOLUTION
by Barney T. Maddox, M.D.
1992 – By Barney T. Maddox, M.D

The theory of evolution proposes over long periods of time, that species of animals can change into different species. If one imagines gradual positive progress of change from bacteria to fish to man (an essential article of faith for the evolutionists), then trillions of positive changes must occur in organisms. Furthermore, these positive changes (mutations) must occur in the genetic material (DNA) of organisms for that change to be passed on from generation to generation. Genetic information (DNA) codes for each species of animal, and that information is remarkably complicated, integrated, and specific for thousands of characteristics of each organism.

Another article of faith for the atheist evolution is that these genetic changes (mutations) leading to new species are not only positive (survival-enhancing), but random (since there is no Guiding Hand). The late Carl Sagan recently summed it up by stating that "over vast amounts of time, there was a slow random accumulation of favorable mutations."

But the overwhelming problem for evolutionists is that any random change in a complex, specific, functioning system wrecks that system. And living things are the most complex functional system in the universe.

DNA is information, or language, that codes for and describes the specific animal. Think about it. Any random change in a sentence or paragraph wrecks the whole system. Imagine trying to randomly (or even directionally) evolve one simple sentence to another through functional intermediates. It's impossible.

Take the following example:

THE CAT SAT

THZ CAT SAT

THZ DAT SAT

THZ DAT SJT

VHZ DAT SJT

VHZ DLT SJT

HER COW ATE

(random mutations)

THE CAT SAT

THE CAT SAE

HHE CAT SAE

HHR CAT SAE

HHR CAW SAE

HAR CAW STE

HER COW ATE

(directed mutations)

Whether the changes are random, or directed, notice that all the intermediate sentences are non-functional. Non-function for an animal, whether in a gene or an anatomic structure, means death , not improvement, as we shall see. And just to get from one simple, functional nine-part sentence and randomly change it into another functional nine-part sentence would require 26 to the ninth power = 5.42 trillion trials. This is hopelessly absurd.

Mutations are just such random changes in the DNA, or genetic material of organisms, and evolution, to succeed in producing higher animal forms, requires that mutations be positive (enhance function and survival).

But scientific observation directly contradicts evolutionary theory. The vast, vast majority of genetic mutations are usually lethal (as our theoretical exercise would predict), or at least crippling to the organism, drastically damaging survival and function. A few examples in humans include Trisomy 21 (Down's syndrome), polycystic kidney disease, and cystic fibrosis.

Until the last few years, when the Human Genom Project pinned mutations down to the gene and even the nucleotide level in DNA, evolutionists could take comfort in the fact that mutations were not very well quantitated as a percent of DNA actually changed. The human Genome Project, assembled in 1988, is a worldwide cooperative effort by genetic researchers to completely decode the entire human genome (all 46 chromosomes) right down to the nucleotide monomer (individual building block molecule) sequence. Out of 50,000 to 100,000 genes in the human genome, 2000 genes have been completely sequenced. The precise mutations (point nucleotide changes) in some fatal hereditary diseases have been determined, and the news is fatal to the theory of evolution.

Cystic fibrosis is an autosomal recessive hereditary disease affecting about 2000 American babies each year. Afflicted children have mucous plugging defects in the lungs, leading to severe, recurring pneumonia, and pancreatic insufficiency. Without medical therapy cystic fibrosis is fatal by age 10, even with excellent care, most patients will die before age 30.

Cystic fibrosis is caused by tiny (point) mutations in chromosome 7, leading to deletion of a single amino acid in as=m ion transport protein, 1,480 amino acids long. The total nucleotide monomer content of the human genome is at least 3 billion nucleotides, all very specifically interdependent in unimaginably complex ways. The cystic fibrosis genetic mutation involves a random change of not more than 3 nucleotides.

The important point is that science has now quantitated that a genetic mutation of as little as 1 billionth (.0000001%) of an animal's genome is relentlessly fatal!

Now the genetic difference between human and his "nearest relative," the chimpanzee, is at least 1.6%. That doesn't sound like much, but calculated out, that is a gap of at least 48 million nucleotide differences that must be bridged by random changes. And a random change of only 3 nucleotides is fatal to an animal (and of course the death of a crippled mutant animal ends all possibility of further change).

Obviously there is no way to bridge even small genetic gaps successfully between animal species closely resembling each other (so called "microevolution"). And imagine macroevolutionary changes, say, just between lizard and bird! The genetic difference is probably around 20%, involving hundreds of millions of nucleotide differences.

And this quantitative genetic information, so overtly destructive to the theory of evolution, doesn't even take into account probabilities. The number of random trials to get from one specific 200 part system to another specific 200 part system would easily exhaust all probabilities in the universe. Imagine how many random trials (I doubt computers could even calculate it) it would take to get form chimpanzee to human (3 billion part system)!

The lastest quantitative genetic information is proving the theory of evolution to be the most irrational belief ever held by man. Each animal species is separated by overwhelmingly unbridgeable genetic, anatomic and functional gaps. This means that each individual species had to be assembled separately, just like Genesis says, by an intelligence whose chemical engineering technology is hundreds of trillions of times as advanced as ours. There is only one word for such an intelligence: God.

In the cystic fibrosis article by Collins, et al, they allude to the human genome as a library and a blueprint. They also refer to it as the "owner's manual." That's not quite correct. The human genome is the "Manufacturer's manual". Information can only originate from intelligence.

Given the latest genetic information about mutations, anyone who persists in believing in evolution should heed his warning: "For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse." Romans 1:21.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Descarte, “It is truth very certain that, when it is not in our power to determine what is true, we ought to follow what is most probable.”

New Species ARE evolving due to random mutation and natural selection.

Selection is NOT random

Random mutations CAN be destructive and they are selected against.

Random mutations CAN be beneficial and they are selected for continuation.

Information IS added through duplication or genes, chromosomes and copying "mistakes" providing for additional variation to be selected for.

This article is NOT representative of what the theory of evolution actually says and what we actually know about the process of random mutation and selection.

The example for random mutation from letters is particularly deceptive. If random mutation happens, cummulative selection will bring about the desired outcome (enhanced survival) the same way as "directed" mutation because UNDESIRABLE combinations will be SELECTED AGAINST and removed.

Selection "directs" species to survive and penalizes those that do not. This is basic knowledge and the logic behind evolution that this author seems to miss.

__________________

The vast majority of mutations are not lethal... they are in fact neutral.  If you were right, than most of us would be dead, because on average we all have several mutations in our DNA. The Cystic fibrosis example is a case where a mutation has occured in an important part of the enzyme sequence which has changed the resulting amino acid to one incompatible with its function.  It is probably located in the "active site" or business-end of the enzyme.  A mutation elsewhere in the enzyme would usually have no significant effect.  This is all simple genetics/ biochemistry.  The Down's Syndrome example is not mutation, it is the result of a mistake during cell division that leads to the lose or increase (I forget which) in the number of chromosomes (#21) that the resulting egg or sperm contain... this is usually fatal in animals, though with Trisomy 21, the baby can survive, albet with various disfunctions.

You are also missing the point that humans and chimps have continued to diverge in their genomes the farther we both get from our common ancestor.  Therefore, the actual % difference in our DNA necessary for a man to be different from a chimp is actually less than 1.6%. 

Today at 12:12 PM Freedom777 said this in Post #1

HUMAN GENOME PROJECT: QUANTITATIVE DISPROOF OF EVOLUTION
by Barney T. Maddox, M.D.
1992 – By Barney T. Maddox, M.D

The theory of evolution proposes over long periods of time, that species of animals can change into different species ....
Another article of faith for the atheist evolution is that these genetic changes (mutations) leading to new species are not only positive (survival-enhancing), but random (since there is no Guiding Hand). The late Carl Sagan recently summed it up by stating that "over vast amounts of time, there was a slow random accumulation of favorable mutations."

There is so much wrong with this article.  First, we have the canard that evolution is atheism.Second, we get the canard that evolution is random.  Mutations are random ONLY with respect to the needs of the individual or the population.  That is, in a climate growing colder, just as many deer with shorter fur will be born as with longer fur.  But the DNA has areas that are very prone to mutations as areas that are very resistant.  While mutations are "random", selection is not.  Selection is the opposite of random; it is pure determinism.  Only the longer furred deer will survive the colder winters.

DNA is information, or language, that codes for and describes the specific animal. Think about it. Any random change in a sentence or paragraph wrecks the whole system. Imagine trying to randomly (or even directionally) evolve one simple sentence to another through functional intermediates. It's impossible.

if you rig the game it's impossible.  Let's see if we can go in a sequence of one letter changes from "the cat sat" to "her cow ate" using only legal words.

THE CAT SAT

THE CAT SAD

THE CAT BAD

THEN CAT BAD

THEN CAT HAD

THEN CAT HAT

THEN CAT HATE

THEN CAT ATE

THEN COT ATE

THEN COW ATE

HEN COW ATE

HER COW ATE

Whether the changes are random, or directed, notice that all the intermediate sentences are non-functional.

 Only because he deliberately picked non-functional sentences.  It took me less than two minutes to find a path.  This is not the only such path.  You've been conned again, Freedom.

Mutations are just such random changes in the DNA, or genetic material of organisms, and evolution, to succeed in producing higher animal forms, requires that mutations be positive (enhance function and survival).

it only requires that some of the mutations are selective within that environment.  Selection will eliminate the rest.

But scientific observation directly contradicts evolutionary theory. The vast, vast majority of genetic mutations are usually lethal (as our theoretical exercise would predict), or at least crippling to the organism, drastically damaging survival and function. A few examples in humans include Trisomy 21 (Down's syndrome), polycystic kidney disease, and cystic fibrosis.

This is known as "selective data".  Actually, the vast majority of mutations are neutral.  Several studies have demonstrated this, but Maddox is unaware of them.  One is PD Keightley and A Caballero, Genomic mutation rates for lifetime reproductive output and lifespan in Caenorhabditis elegans.  Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94: 3823-3827, 1997The actual deleterious mutation rate as Maddox describes is 2.6 per thousand mutations.

 Cystic fibrosis is an autosomal recessive hereditary disease affecting about 2000 American babies each year.

Out of how many babies born?  About 10 million or so.  That's only 0.001 %

The important point is that science has now quantitated that a genetic mutation of as little as 1 billionth (.0000001%) of an animal's genome is relentlessly fatal!

Ah, but it has also documented millions of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that have no effect whatsoever.  Maddox failed to mention these, didn't he?  Yet cystic fibrosis is just one SNP out of all these millions.

And this quantitative genetic information, so overtly destructive to the theory of evolution, doesn't even take into account probabilities. The number of random trials to get from one specific 200 part system to another specific 200 part system would easily exhaust all probabilities in the universe.

If it were all random and there were no cumulative selection. 

This means that each individual species had to be assembled separately, just like Genesis says, by an intelligence whose chemical engineering technology is hundreds of trillions of times as advanced as ours. There is only one word for such an intelligence: God.

Except for those species that we have observed to evolve from another species. With DNA differences, I might add, twice that between humans and chimps.

 The human genome is the "Manufacturer's manual". Information can only originate from intelligence.

Information results whenever there is selection between possibilities.  Selection does exactly that.  But Maddox is right; creationism is about manufacture. That is a point often obscured by creationists.  It's nice to see one admitting it.  Having admitted it, now it's easy to falsify.

Freedom777:

When I said "Don't just post one word and a link" I thought I also implied "Don't just copy and paste an article." SAY SOMETHING OF YOUR OWN FOR ONCE! *sigh*

Additionally, it occurs to me that compare genes to letters is inherently flawed. While lucaspa brilliantly demonstrated that this particular example fails miserably, is there really anything to be gained from this comparison at all? Some mutations, certainly, will do Bad Things(tm). But if you swap out one piece of code in a genome, you don't destroy the genome's function, as proven by the several DNA mutations carried in each and every one of us.

__________________
--Zadok001, aka Greater Good fanatic

Yes, it is inherently flawed.  Maddox's omits to say his premise that one and only one protein sequence will work for any one protein.  That is demonstrably false by comparing the same protein -- such as cytochrome c -- between species.  One quickly finds that there are thousands and tens of thousands of sequences that will do the same job.  So it is easy to modify them without losing function.

Again, Maddox's examples are selective data.