SavedByTheLord Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 The first living creature could not have come into being by random chance. It is impossible. A first living creature would have to have had at least 100,000 amino acids in a particular sequence. This is extremely generous. The smallest free-living thing has over 1,300,000 base pairs. I also have not included having over 500 million other atoms in it. The odds against a sequence of 100,000 amino acids (20 types, 39 counting handedness) coming to be by random chance is (10 to the 160,000 power) to 1. That could never have happened anywhere in the universe over the supposed 13.7 billion years of its existence. It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. There are other factors that make it impossible. It would be a miracle.Where would such an amount of amino acids even occur in nature to even make a first creature? They must be in very near proximity to where the first creature came to be. In water they would immediately diluted and chemical reactions would destroy it. And above ground or in space, it would be destroyed by the the sunlight. So the first creature is impossible. If such a great miracle did occur, the poor creature will not survive long at all. It is not protected from its environment. Chemical reactions will begin to destroy it within seconds. Which is just another problem. It would take too long to assemble itself. Destruction will happen faster than construction. The poor creature cannot feed itself. It will also not be able to repair itself. It will not be able to have any offspring. So it could never exist. So even if it did come into existence, it would die quickly and could not have offspring And that is just to get to the first living thing. There would have to at least 1 trillion other miracles to produce all the living creatures by evolution. That would be about 70 miracles for each of the supposed 13.7 billion years. That is impossible to have happened by random chance. Therefore, God created all things. A simple elegant proof. Assume no God. Show the contradictions. Therefore, God exists. The proof that the Bible is the true word of God is also easy. The atheists have been deceived into believing that the first creature could come into existence by random chance. Never has been observed. Simple analysis shows it is impossible. There is no record that it ever did. So, the evolutionist has the burden of proof. -5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Endy0816 Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 It was lot simpler than what life has evolved to become. Most of what we see today is in response to a harsher environment and other lifeforms. We're likely distantly related to crystals. Some bacteria use biocrystalization as a defense mechanism even today. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10403254/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 1 hour ago, SavedByTheLord said: It actually is impossible because no concentration of that amount of amino acids would happen by random chance. Since you have posted this in a true science section I suggest you go and learn the most basic law of 'chance'. An event with a definable probability, no matter how small, could be the next event in a probability space, no matter how unlikely that may be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByTheLord Posted September 23, 2023 Author Share Posted September 23, 2023 Although I just calculated the odds against the first living creature, I also Showed that it was impossible to happen for other reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 The odds against the first living creature are, by definition, zero since it happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByTheLord Posted September 23, 2023 Author Share Posted September 23, 2023 How do I reply to a pos? 1 minute ago, studiot said: The odds against the first living creature are, by definition, zero since it happened. Yeah the first living creature was created by God, certainly not by random processes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzkpfw Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 The chance of someone who has no idea about current theories of abiogenesis correctly calculating the "probability of life" is approximately zero. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByTheLord Posted September 23, 2023 Author Share Posted September 23, 2023 Just now, pzkpfw said: The chance of someone who has no idea about current theories of abiogenesis correctly calculating the "probability of life" is approximately zero. What was the first creature? About how many amino acids were in it? Was DNA based, RNA based, protein only or some mix? Where did it come into being? Ocean? Land? Atmosphere? Space? Mud? If you do not know, how can you have a theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
studiot Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 9 minutes ago, SavedByTheLord said: How do I reply to a pos? Yeah the first living creature was created by God, certainly not by random processes. You are just demonstrating ignorance of the way statistics and probability (they are not the same thing) work. Probabilities of 1 and 0 have special meanings, not possessed or needed by inbetween probabilities. Most people who think they know statistics are unaware of this. I wish I had £1 for each time I have pointed out on this forum alone that the 3 special meanings of a probability of 1 for instance are taught on the UK GCSE syllabus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SavedByTheLord Posted September 23, 2023 Author Share Posted September 23, 2023 1 minute ago, studiot said: You are just demonstrating ignorance of the way statistics and probability (they are not the same thing) work. Probabilities of 1 and 0 have special meanings, not possessed or needed by inbetween probabilities. Most people who think they know statistics are unaware of this. I wish I had £1 for each time I have pointed out on this forum alone that the 3 special meanings of a probability of 1 for instance are taught on the UK GCSE syllabus. I know probability. The King James Bible has about 3,000,000 characters in it. Forget capital letters vs lower case letters and only considering letters, the odds against that sequence being reproduced by random chance is 26^3,000,000 to 1 or about 10^4,200,000 to 1. Now if you had 10^250 chances at it, what are the odds against that happening? 10^4,199,750 to 1. That is mind bogglingly against abiogenesis. But you say it is certain. They put people to death for DNA with odds of only 10^18. But I also included other information which makes it impossible fro that creature to come into being or to have an offspring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVat Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 Baffling that this kind of drivel isn't in the Trash thread. Why engage with this nonsense? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genady Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 I wish the Science Forums dot net were more strictly Science Forums dot net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted September 23, 2023 Share Posted September 23, 2023 ! Moderator Note Proselytizing is a rules violation. Posting this in Evolution makes this a bad faith argument (advancing an agenda) Also, the outcomes of chemistry are not random, so the scientific argument is based on a misconception, which I’m sure you will correct. Thou shalt not bear false witness, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts