Thank you for taking the time to share your understanding and belief system.
Chirality is a chemical term that means handedness. Although two chemical molecules may appear to have the same elements and similar properties, they can still have different structures. When two molecules appear identical and their structures differ only by being mirror images of each other, those molecules are said to have chirality. Your left and right hands illustrate chirality. Your hands may appear to be identical, but in reality, they are only mirror images of each other, hence the term handedness. For this reason, chirality can exist as a right-handed or a left-handed molecule, and each individual molecule is called an optical isomer.
What is the problem of chirality? In our bodies, proteins and DNA possess a unique 3-dimensional shape, and it is because of this 3D shape that the biochemical processes within our bodies work as they do. It is chirality that provides the unique shape for proteins and DNA, and without chirality, the biochemical processes in our bodies would not do their job. In our body, every single amino acid of every protein is found with the same left-handed chirality.
It is a universally accepted fact of chemistry that chirality cannot be created in chemical molecules by a random process. When a random chemical reaction is used to prepare molecules having chirality, there is an equal opportunity to prepare the left-handed isomer as well as the right-handed isomer. It is a scientifically verifiable fact that a random chance process, which forms a chiral product, can only be a 50% right-handed /50% left-handed mixture of the two optical isomers**.
Let's look at chirality in proteins and DNA. Proteins are polymers of amino acids and each one of the component amino acids exists as the "L" or left-handed optical isomer. Even though the "R" or right-handed optical isomers can be synthesized in the lab, this isomer does not exist in natural proteins. The DNA molecule is made up of billions of complicated chemical molecules called nucleotides, and these nucleotide molecules exist as the "R" or right-handed optical isomer. The "L" isomer of nucleotides can be prepared in the lab, but they do not exist in natural DNA. There is no way that a random chance process could have formed these proteins and DNA with their unique chirality.
If proteins and DNA were formed by chance, each and every one of the components would be a 50/50 mixture of the two optical isomers. This is not what we see in natural proteins or in natural DNA. How can a random chance natural process create proteins with thousands of "L" molecules, and then also create DNA with billions of "R" molecules? Does this sound like random chance or a product of design?
Probability and genetics are both sciences and not some kind of conspiracy,
I don't think there is enough physical evidence, if any at all, on the earth that supports a natural selection process occurring over millions of years with one kind of animal becoming another kind of animal.
@lostinthewoods Look at the image I showed you. Fossils, carbon dating and DNA all show this to be true.
All you need to do is to show where this is not the case, and we can throw evolution out.
As we haven't been able to do that even though we have mapped the relationship between a ridiculous amount of lifeforms, can you not see how extremely improbable it is for us to have constructed that chart without running into problems?
I don't understand what else you require in terms of evidence, when it is already extremely overwhelming. Every science that have been used to prove it works.
Radiocarbon dating is the period of time after which half of a given sample will have decayed. It is about 5,730 years, the oldest dates that can be reliably measured by this process date to around 50,000 years ago
You cannot carbon date something that is supposedly millions of years old.
This is true.
We have found dinosaur bones with live tissue in them. From millions of years ago? Does this mean we have to have to have a hard look at what we know about cell degradation? Sounds more like we need to have a hard look at how old we think dinosaurs are. Here is a video that you might find interesting.
Dear @lostinthewoods,
You should post comment with the video and address it:
Dear @jwamshop
@lastdays I already explained how random events in constained environments can lead to complex functioning mechanisms. I took Machine Learning as an alternative implementation (to evolution).
After you realize that random events in a constrained environment can create mechanisms that are non-random, you will understand the flaw in your argument.
The flaw in your argument is that external pressures other than radiation cannot change DNA. Where did the information come from in the genetic code which is a language? Oxygen and water inhibit RNA formation other than within the confines of a cell.
I never said external pressure changes DNA.
You still seem to confuse evolution with pre-darwinian ideas of nature "controlling" species.
External pressure is what makes specific genetic mutations more desirable than others in that particular setting. Statistically speaking. I've already pointed this out multiple times.
Machine learning is a practical application of this that we use daily to let a solution grow together by injecting random mutations to the model.
We now have models that can, for example, detect cancer in x-rays without us understanding why.
We have grown the models with the same evolutionary principle.
You are claiming that evolution isn't true while the mechanism of it is true and in use in many places. So, what exactly are you opposing?
Dear @jwamshop,
What I am pointing out is that evolution cannot be the cause of the origin of life.
The first proof I presented is "chirality." You never replied to my question, "How can a random chance natural process create proteins with thousands of "L" molecules, and then also create DNA with billions of "R" molecules?"
The answer is that random chance and natural processes cannot create proteins with thousands of "Left-handed" molecules, or create DNA with billions of "Right-handed molecules.
Other scientific proofs that "Abiogenesis" (the original evolution of life or living organisms from inorganic or inanimate substances) cannot occur are the water and oxygen problems:
When speculating about the naturalistic origins of life on Earth, evolutionists run into a major paradox of basic biological chemistry: While water is the critical medium for all life, it also forms a chemical barrier to the formation of chains of nucleotides such as RNA and DNA that are the foundation of life. In a living creature, this is not a problem because of the complex chemistry and machinery of the cell. But for the evolutionary theorist, this creates yet one more insurmountable barrier for how nucleic acids could have spontaneously formed in the first place.
Another major impediment to life’s naturalistic origin is the atmospheric problem. Earth’s current atmosphere is oxidizing (i.e., oxygen rich) and prohibits the spontaneous formation of biomolecules outside the protection of a living cell. Geological data indicate Earth’s atmosphere has always been oxidizing. Nevertheless, evolutionists maintain that for biomolecules to spontaneously form, Earth must have had a reducing atmosphere with little or no oxygen. Even assuming it did, the problem of how nucleobases, the building blocks of DNA and RNA, could have spontaneously formed is still impossible.
I appreciate your time and willingness to dialogue with me in a respectful manner.
Thank you, Steven Sherman @lastdays