Here’s a few calculations by scientists and researchers. I
am not good with Maths so I cannot verify them. I have to take their word for
it:
“The likelihood of developing two binding sites in a protein
complex would be the square of the probability of developing one: a double CCC
(chloroquine complexity cluster), 10^20 times 10^20, which is 10^40. There have
likely been fewer than 10^40 cells in the entire world in the past 4 billion
years, so the odds are against a single event of this variety (just 2 binding
sites being generated by accident) in the history of life. It is biologically
unreasonable.”
Michael J. Behe PhD. (from page 146 of his book “Edge of Evolution”)
Evolution vs. Functional Proteins (“Mount Improbable”) –
Doug Axe and Stephen Meyer – Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rgainpMXa8
Regardless of how the trials are performed, the answer ends
up being at least half of the total number of password possibilities, which is
the staggering figure of 10^77 (written out as 100, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000,
000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000, 000,
000, 000, 000, 000). Armed with this calculation, you should be very confident
in your skepticism, because a 1 in 10^77 chance of success is, for all
practical purposes, no chance of success. My experimentally based estimate of
the rarity of functional proteins produced that same figure, making these
likewise apparently beyond the reach of chance.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....35561.html
On the Origin of Mitochondria: Reasons for Skepticism on the
Endosymbiotic Story
Jonathan M. – January 10, 2012
Excerpt: While we find examples of similarity between eukaryotic mitochondria
and bacterial cells, other cases also reveal stark differences. In addition,
the sheer lack of a mechanistic basis for mitochondrial endosymbiotic
assimilation ought to — at the very least — give us reason for caution and the
expectation of some fairly spectacular evidence for the claim being made. At
present, however, such evidence does not exist — and justifiably gives one
cause for skepticism.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....54891.html
Bacteria Too Complex To Be Primitive Eukaryote Ancestors –
July 2010
Excerpt: “Bacteria have long been considered simple relatives of eukaryotes,”
wrote Alan Wolfe for his colleagues at Loyola. “Obviously, this misperception
must be modified…. There is a whole process going on that we have been blind
to.”,,, For one thing, Forterre and Gribaldo revealed serious shortcomings with
the popular “endosymbiosis” model – the idea that a prokaryote engulfed an
archaea and gave rise to a symbiotic relationship that produced a eukaryote.
http://www.creationsafaris.com.....#20100712b
Bacterial Protein Acetylation: The Dawning of a New Age – July
2012
Excerpt: Bacteria have long been considered simple relatives of eukaryotes.
Obviously, this misperception must be modified. From the presence of a
cytoskeleton to the packaging of DNA to the existence of multiple
post-translational modifications, bacteria clearly implement highly
sophisticated mechanisms to regulate diverse cellular processes precisely.
http://darwins-god.blogspot.co.....wning.html