User:Gracelandtm

Hello new to the RW. Need help asap. I came across this one guy that denies evolution based on certain things that i have no idea on what he is talking about etc. This is one of the things he said.. "Loss of information is documented well in all scientific journals, the gain of information is always overwhelmed by deleterious mutations, that is a new which I'm pretty sure you've not heard of yet. The DNA is so complex that it contains overlapping information and inverted meanings reading through back and forth.  To even suggests that a random chance mutation could add useful information into the genome is delirious at best.﻿" Idk much of science am still learning  :P

Thx for the info FuzzyCatPotato. I am new to this wiki site deal. I have no idea on what to do lol... It will take me time to understand this site and how to edit properly. Oh an other one... Some of what you posted kinda refutes this but what about organisms. "what you have just said is exactly what I said partially, the microevolution part works for bacteria but never works for Organisms that reproduce.

You have to realise that the deleterious mutations do already overwhelm the gain of information in the Organism's lifetime before or after it reproduces.

Let's say I grant you the assumption of the primary axiom being true, where is such evidence? From your own admittance of the assumption that, for an animal that reproduces and passes on a beneficial mutation to its offsprings is 1 in 100000000000,therefore for the primary axiom to be a reality, it needs to go like this; 1 in 100000000000 chance to add a useful building letter into the genome by random chance,

An organ I.e the vocal cord consists of a few billion letters

Henceforth for an Organism to create a new organ that was never present in its original form you will need a probability of this happening to be 1/1000000000000 to the power of 10000000 which a number which cannot be written down even on a piece of paper.

You are saying by this probability it happened.

So back to the point where I grant you this assumption, by this assumption it MUST therefore be accepted in all Organisms to see half assed formed organs forming in their genome.

The fact of the matter is there is not a single one, not one none at all."