Quote# 43086

The smallest living cell on earth has a DNA string of some 1 million pairs of DNA and has 600 genes. [...] The chances of such an arangement of DNA arising by sheer chance are 4 to the 250'000th power, and that's generous. [...]
The problem though is even worse than that. Not only do you need two strings of DNA perfectly matched to have life, but you also need a cell so the DNA code can get the material to sustain that life. It's therefore a chicken-and-egg problem. [...]
Add to this problem that for the first life to have been the progenator of all life on earth, it necessarily needs to have been pretty much the same as all life now on earth, otherwise it couldn't have been the source of all life we now know.
What this means is this: the first life on earth had to require oxygen in order for them to be the ancestors of oxygen-requiring life, that's common sense. [...]

MySweetLordJesus, Youtube 34 Comments [7/19/2008 2:09:06 PM]
Fundie Index: 2
Submitted By: Mithcoriel
Username:
Comment:



1 2 | bottom

484

"The chances of such an arangement of DNA arising by sheer chance are 4 to the 250'000th power, and that's generous. [...]"

Very, VERY generous, do you understand how probability works?

7/19/2008 2:32:20 PM

rubber chicken

Common sense doesn't work like that!

7/19/2008 2:56:06 PM

agentCDE

Yeah, and the first buildings ever had to be made out of steel-reinforced concrete, 'cause just look at modern skyscrapers.

Oh wait.

7/19/2008 3:00:45 PM

Mortok

No.

Plants were the first life on earth. Plants take in carbon dioxide and CREATE oxygen. Then when other forms of life came along, the oxygen they needed was already there.

Or something along those lines. I must confess evolutionary science is not my forte.

I still understand it better than you.

7/19/2008 3:02:08 PM

Illuminatalie

It's cute when they try to be all logical and scientific and pretend they understand us better than we'll ever understand them, etc.

7/19/2008 3:03:44 PM



Anything requiring "common sense" leaves you at a definite disadvantage Sweetie!

7/19/2008 3:50:04 PM

JonnyTruant

Um... not everything on earth requires oxygen. Ever heard of an anaerobic bacterium? Rather, we're all carbon based life here on earth. DNA sequences only come in pairs. You're not going to find any other kind, so that hurts your probability thingy a bit. And amino acid strands are naturally occurring making the opportunity for initial life fairly likely over enough time.

7/19/2008 3:56:35 PM

Pyroclasm

MULTIFAIL!

7/19/2008 4:20:45 PM

aaa

Catastrophic fail.

7/19/2008 4:23:37 PM

szena

The odds of all your ancestors having sex at exactly the right time and each relevant sperm out of millions being the one that didn't get flushed out are so incredibly small that you can't possibly exist.

7/19/2008 4:43:09 PM

werewolf

You know, a good book on general science would clear up MSLJ's ignorance and confusion.

Sad that.

7/19/2008 4:50:41 PM

Dale

Life existed long before oxygen was in earth's atmosphere.

7/19/2008 4:56:19 PM

Mike

The smallest living cell on earth has a DNA string of some 1 million pairs of DNA and has 600 genes. [...] The chances of such an arangement of DNA arising by sheer chance are 4 to the 250'000th power, and that's generous. [...]

Did you pull that number out of your ass?

The problem though is even worse than that. Not only do you need two strings of DNA perfectly matched to have life, but you also need a cell so the DNA code can get the material to sustain that life.

You fail at biology. Most of those single celled creatures don't form by themselves but are usually clones of the parent, sometimes with a mutation. They literally split off with all needed parts.

It's therefore a chicken-and-egg problem. [...]

O RLY?

Add to this problem that for the first life to have been the progenator of all life on earth, it necessarily needs to have been pretty much the same as all life now on earth,

Says who? Maybe it was the starter of all life, but most of the species, that have ever lived, have become extinct!

otherwise it couldn't have been the source of all life we now know.

*facepalm*

What this means is this: the first life on earth had to require oxygen in order for them to be the ancestors of oxygen-requiring life, that's common sense. [...]

Uh, no. Read your biology textbook.

7/19/2008 5:05:01 PM

Ozzie

My Sweet Lord Jesus, what the hell does [...] mean at the end of every sentence?

7/19/2008 5:16:52 PM



He also fails to take into account that the earliest living cells were in all likelihood nowhere near as complex as the cells we see today.

7/19/2008 5:42:57 PM

Imroy

Ozzie: I take the "[...]" bits to mean something has been cut out for reasons of brevity. Knowing MySweetLordJesus (a.k.a VenomFangX) he probably rambled on and threw out all sorts of nonsensical claims. FSTDT isn't the place for essays, so it was cut down to get to the important bits.

7/19/2008 6:11:04 PM

toothache

It's Kent Hovind, Jr.!

7/19/2008 6:55:09 PM

Antichrist

common sense isn't very common anymore.

7/19/2008 7:04:29 PM

JESUS PLEASE COME SOON!

Yes, because it's not like plants 'breathe' carbon dioxide instead of oxygen or anything crazy like that.

7/19/2008 7:05:46 PM

anonymous_troy

"the first life on earth had to require oxygen"

Aerobic bacteria prolly evolved from anaerobic bacteria.

Plus statistics has no bearing on how things form. The odds of that puddle existing are even worse.

7/19/2008 7:14:49 PM

ID82

Making up numbers for Jesus.

7/19/2008 7:45:04 PM

Old Viking

I was simply going to utter an exclamation, then I noticed it's this person's user name.

7/19/2008 8:10:47 PM

Jay-Sus

Fail on a whole new level.

7/19/2008 9:05:31 PM

anevilmeme

Whenever one of these fundtards starts blathering about 4 to the 250,000 bullshit means not only do they not understand biology they don't understand chemistry.

7/19/2008 9:14:26 PM

Sheik yer Bouti

"4 to the 250'000th power"

Are you sure you don't mean "2 to the 250,001th power"?

You fail math.

7/19/2008 9:35:30 PM

1 2 | top: comments page