Modern studies of the molecular world are leading the scientific community to one fundamental conclusion: God exists. A detailed study of the structure of a protein molecule plunges scientists into shock, leaving not even the slightest chance for the possibility of spontaneous formation without the participation of a Higher Power.
A protein molecule is the foundation of a living cell and consists of a certain set of amino acids. The number of amino acids in proteins varies from 50 to a thousand or more. In this case, the amino acids should be of only one type (L – amino acids), located in a strict sequence, and connected to each other only by a peptide bond. If any of these conditions are violated in the structure of a protein molecule, it turns into a useless set of amino acids, which cannot be a link in living matter.
The very need for strict ordering, for example, an average protein molecule of 500 amino acids of 20 species, indicates a rather complex configuration of the molecular world. If we assume that amino acids can spontaneously fold in the desired sequence, then the probability of such a case is 1 / 10⁶⁵⁰, i.e. one chance out of a huge number with 650 zeros.
How did this figure come about?
Here's trivial math. The probability of choosing the correct amino acid from 20 types is 1/20. And the probability of correctly choosing all 500 amino acids is 1 / 20⁵⁰⁰, which is 1 / 10⁶⁵⁰.
Now let's consider the probability of choosing only L-amino acids. L and D-amino acids have chemically the same composition, but differ in the opposite arrangement of tertiary structures. In this case, the proteins of all living organisms consist only of L-amino acids, and if at least one D-amino acid is in the protein structure, it will become unusable. The probability that out of the two available types of amino acids (D and L), an L-amino acid will be present is 1/2. In the case when there are 500 amino acids in the protein, the probability that they will be only L - forms is 1 / 2⁵⁰⁰, which is 1 / 10¹⁵⁰., I.e. one chance in 10 to the 150th power.
It remains to take into account the likelihood of connecting amino acids with a peptide bond. Amino acids form various compounds with each other, but for the formation of a protein molecule it is necessary that the amino acids are connected to each other only by a peptide bond. It has been found that the probability of amino acid connection by a peptide bond is 50%, i.e. 1/2. If there are 500 amino acids in a protein, the overall probability is 1 / 2⁴⁹⁹, which is 1 / 10¹⁵⁰., I.e. one chance in 10 to the 150th power.
Promotional video:
To take into account all three factors and calculate the overall probability, you need to multiply the resulting probabilities. 1 / 10⁶⁵⁰ x 1 / 10¹⁵⁰ x 1 / 10¹⁵⁰ = 1 / 10⁹⁵⁰, i.e. one chance in 10 to 950! Just imagine: one chance in 10 to 950 degrees! To say that the odds are simply zero is to say nothing. In mathematics, the probability of 1 / 10⁵⁰ is already considered to be zero …
Dr. James Coppedge of the California Center for the Study of Probability in Biology has made some startling calculations. The scientist applied all the laws of the study of probability to the possibility of the accidental appearance of a single protein molecule. His discoveries are revolutionary. He calculated the probability of a world that has the entire surface of the earth at its disposal - all the oceans, all the atoms, the entire earth's crust. Then he suggested that the binding of amino acids would occur at a rate of one and a half trillion times higher than that with which they bind in nature. Calculating the possibilities, he determined that it would take 10²⁶² years to accidentally form a single protein molecule. This is an astronomical number with 262 zeros, exceeding the currently known age of the universe.
Therefore, without the participation of the Creator, even such a simple compound of living matter as a protein molecule, a brick, from which more complex compounds, cells, organisms, etc. are formed, cannot be formed?
It all boils down to the fact that the theory of evolution is faced with the inexplicability of the formation of only one protein molecule.
Is there trial and error in nature?
It is necessary to note an important point concerning the meaning of the examples given: these calculations of probabilities prove the impossibility of accidental protein formation. However, there is a more important side of the issue, which is considered a dead end from the point of view of evolutionists: in fact, such a process cannot even be started in nature, since there is no mechanism in nature that would try to obtain a protein by trial and error.
Calculations provided to show the likelihood of a 500 amino acid protein will only be valid under ideal (non-naturally occurring) trial and error conditions. So, if we imagine that an unknown force accidentally combined 500 amino acids, but realizing that it was wrong, disassembled and once again began to assemble them in a different order, then the probability of obtaining the desired protein by an imaginary mechanism will be equal to I versus 10 ^ 950. And with each experience there will be a need to separate and connect them again in a certain order. With each new attempt, it is necessary to suspend the synthesis, prevent the interference of even one inappropriate amino acid, control whether the protein has been formed, if not, then disassemble the entire chain and start the whole process over again.
It is also necessary that no foreign chemical element is involved in the process. During the experiment, it is imperative that all 500 links in the chain be completed before attempting a new attempt. That is, all the aforementioned probabilities, their beginning, end, and each stage are under the control of a conscious mechanism, which presents to the case only "selection of amino acids". The presence of such a mechanism in nature is impossible. It follows from this that the formation of protein in the natural environment is impossible purely technically, not to mention "accidentally". But in principle, the speech about the existence of some kind of probability in this case will in itself be evidence of an exclusively anti-scientific approach.
But some ignorant evolutionists cannot grasp this. They consider protein synthesis to be a simple chemical reaction, as a result of which they come to such ridiculous conclusions as: "Amino acids, interacting with each other, form protein." Meanwhile, spontaneous chemical reactions occurring in an inorganic environment form the simplest and primitive compounds, the number and type of which is known and limited. To obtain a more complex chemical, large factories, chemical facilities, and laboratories are needed. Medicines, chemicals used daily are examples of this. March 9, 2019
Do you believe in any
And proteins are much more complex than the chemicals produced by industry. Therefore, the formation of protein, this miracle of design and engineering, from a simple chemical reaction is absolutely impossible.
Let's put aside all the impossibilities for a while and allow the accidental formation of a biomolecule. But even here evolution is helpless. Because for the subsequent viability of the protein, it must be isolated from the natural environment where it was located, and create special conditions. Otherwise, this protein will be destroyed under the influence of external factors on the surface of the Earth or, as a result of combining with other amino acids and chemicals, it will turn into a completely different substance and lose its specificity.
Attempts by evolutionists to find an answer to the question of the origin of living
The question of the emergence of life on Earth has led evolutionists to a dead end so that they try not to touch on this issue as much as possible. And they try to get rid of it with such general phrases as: "A living organism was formed in water by the interaction of some random factors." Because the obstacle they faced is not one that can be overcome. Unlike aspects of evolution associated with paleontology, in this case they do not even have fossil remains, which they could somehow support their theory. Therefore, the theory of evolution collapses even in its early stages.
One thing should not be forgotten: the presence of a contradiction at any stage of the evolutionary process is sufficient to completely refute it. For example, the refutation of only the accidental formation of a protein refutes all statements regarding the subsequent stages of evolution. After that, there is no point in speculating with the skulls of a monkey and a man.
The emergence of a living organism from inorganic substances was one of the problems that evolutionists avoided for quite a long time. This problem was constantly neglected, however, over time, the question became an edge, and in the second quarter of the 20th century, through various experiments, attempts began to overcome it. "How was a living cell formed in the primary atmosphere of the Earth?" is the first question evolutionists had to answer. More precisely, how were they supposed to present it?
Scientists and evolutionary researchers have conducted a series of laboratory experiments to answer these questions, which have never received much attention from the scientific community.
The most authoritative work among evolutionists regarding the emergence of life on Earth is the experience of the American researcher Stanley Miller, conducted in 1953 and known as the Miller experiment (since the experiment was conducted with the participation of Harold Urie, Miller's teacher, it is also called the Uri experiment -Miller ). Despite the development of technology and the past half century, nothing new has been undertaken in this area. Even today, textbooks cite Miller's experience as an evolutionary explanation for the origin of the first living organism. Evolutionists understand that such attempts do not strengthen their positions, but only refute their theory, and therefore in every possible way refrain from conducting similar experiments.