Update: the Theory of Evolution falsified at Last Universal Common Ancestor
... NASA's Exobiology program... origin, evolution, and distribution of life in the universe...(1)
"... research in the area of the cosmic evolution of the biogenic compounds is to determine the history of the biogenic elements (C, H, N, O, P, S) from their birth in stars to their incorporation into planetary bodies."(1)
Location, location, location ... the boys and girls in white cloaks are looking for a location where prebiotic (hypothetical biochemistry)(2) evolution can take place.
Unless you fully grasp the perplexity of the current state of the Theory of Evolution; it might seem a little strange we're spending billions looking for the "origins of life" on Mars and distant moons, where there's no solid evidence of life, instead of on Earth, where there's incalculable life on just about every square inch.
"There's no way on Earth now, even by looking at ancient rocks, to see that prebiotic history."Astrobiology Magazine
Prebiodites(3) are imaginary RNA chemical molecules that are theorized to be a precursor to the first cell.
This gets a little tricky. You see, Prebiodites don't really exist. In fact, no one knows if they ever existed. We do know that Prebiodites can't exist anywhere on Earth today. These imaginary little dudes hate oxygen.
Killer Oxygen: We like oxygen, but for Prebiodites it's a killer. It's interesting that we can't live without oxygen but the chemical compounds, our bodies consist of, can't form in oxygen.
"... we've shown that either you have a reducing atmosphere or you are not going to have the organic compounds required for life." - Stanley L. Miller(4)
Note to NASA: Hey NASA dudes; why not play around with this thing in a test tube instead of spending billions of dollars traipsing all over the Universe looking for Prebiodites. If you ever came up with some evidence these critters ever existed, then I could see spending a few bucks.
investigate the planetary and molecular processes that set the physical and chemical conditions within which living systems arose(1)
This covers the evolution of chemicals into Prebiodites.(3) Prebiodites are imaginary RNA chemical molecules that are theorized to be a precursor to the first cell.
I like the way the good doctor puts it; "... which organize themselves into a heterotrophic organism ...". Doc, could you fill us in on how this miracle takes place? Probably just me, but I'm having a hard time picturing chemicals organizing themselves into a living entity
To pretend that Prebiodites ever existed on Earth, we have to assume that the Earth had a reducing atmosphere at one time. (little or no oxygen)
Why prebiotic evolution? Back in the day, little was known of the expansive complexity of the most simple cell. It wasn't that hard for some to swallow the assumption that the first cell could just pop into being out of rocks. Louis Pasteur threw a monkey wrench into the works.
In the 1860s, Louis Pasteur concluded that the spontaneous generation of microbes was not possible; all life on Earth came from preexisting life. The weight of Louis Pasteur's observation wasn't fully excepted by evolutionist until science advanced and the complexity of the most simple cell was realized.
Then along came The Theory of Prebiotic Evolution. This is pure science fiction, folks. The kinder term it goes under is, "hypothetical biochemistry"(2). Keep in mind, we're talking about something that there's no indication ever existed or any trace of; no fossils, no nothing.
Organic: Some of the terms seem to suggest biological origin. In many cases the definitions have evolved to only mean chemicals necessary for life. "They used to make a distinction between organic, meaning of biological origin, and inorganic..."(4) Dr. Stanley L. Miller
Don't forget folks, prebiotic evolution isn't about an entity that's actually alive, just chemicals in a cooking state.
Then again, they are kind of living because they are "evolving".
Then again, they're not alive but do alive like things.
Then again ... this is getting confusing!
Doesn't really matter because, so far, the whole thing is a bust.
Not to worry; "New theories are emerging, diverse viewpoints are finding encouragement, and there are several competing hypotheses regarding prebiotic chemical systems. New data, new observations, and new techniques are required."(2)
In other words, the theory is brain dead. Why not just pull the plug on the damn thing and move on?
investigate two natural repositories of evolutionary history available on Earth: the molecular record in living organisms and the geological record in rocks(1)
Currently, we don't have a clue of "what setting life first appeared" in; "We really don't know what the Earth was like three or four billion years ago. So there are all sorts of theories and speculations."(4) Dr. Stanley L. Miller
We do know that it's impossible for the right chemical compounds, necessary for life, to exist together anywhere on Earth today; "... we've shown that either you have a reducing atmosphere or you are not going to have the organic compounds required for life."(4) Dr. Stanley L. Miller
No matter how small and simple you imagine the first little guy to be, it has to be able to perform the basic functions of the most simple entity that can exist.
It has to have enough intelligence to know that it needs to eat, what it needs to eat, and where to find it, and how to get to it; know that it needs to reproduce, know how to reproduce, and built-in intelligence to perform the operation.
We're talking a mini-computer, smaller than the eye can see! It has to instantly have a fully functioning operating system with programming capable of controlling all its bodily functions.
On top of that, it has to pass the OS and programming to its offspring.
It has to be able to manufacture all the chemicals and molecules it needs to sustain itself and reproduce.
It has to know how to build DNA and manufacture all the necessary building materials.
And the little fella has to instantly be able to do all this when it first pops into being!
The most simple one cell knows how to build all the chemicals needed for life, even in our oxygen rich environment. All the scientist in the world don't have a clue how to do that ... and we call it simple?
There's lots of theories here; submarine vents, lagoon with mild temperatures, ocean and photosynthesis, ... many more.
Keep in mind that no one has an idea of how all the right chemicals could be in the same place at the same time. Then the chemicals have to suddenly pop into a living being that is able to reproduce itself.
In other words, the first microbe had to be a self-contained, very complex, computer-controlled little machine, able to reproduce itself; able to convert some food source into energy.
Instantly; everything has to be in place and ready to work when it pops into being!
Then, all of a sudden, it has to come alive! I'm guessing that's what "biotic energy transduction" implies.
membrane function: Recent scientific enlightenment on the complexity of the most simple cell's membrane sent many theories to Davy Jones' Locker.
Before we do any elucidating on the "forces operating on microbial evolution" don't we need some elucidation of the core assumption, "evolution"?
Scientific advancement over the last 150 years has rendered a lot of early assumptions impotent. The necessary complexity of the most simple form of life that can exist has cut the legs out from underneath the entire theory.
Mars, remote moons, catching comet dust; a few billion here, a few billion there ... pretty soon, we're talking real money.
What if this dog don't hunt?
We could use any bodily function or extremity, but the eye is a rich example.
There's some real problems here! Which came first; the eyeball or the software? (the brain's understanding of how to manipulate the eye)
According to our Theory (considered blasphemy to question) entities evolve because random mutation gives them an advantage over their brothers and sisters.
There's no scenario where anything but a fully functioning eye would offer an entity an advantage over it's fellows. In fact, it would be a strong disadvantage. (twig in eye ... end of species)
No way an eye could have evolved over a long period of time. Either everything works as a complete package, or all the parts are completely worthless.
Two Eyes? Where are the one-eyed fossils and species? It doesn't quite make sense that two eyes would randomly pop into being at the same time.
... we'll just assume that two eyes were the fashion statement from the get.
Butterfly Blues: The butterfly defies our infallible theory. It doesn't exist ... at least it's not supposed to.
There's no way for the intermediate phases of the butterfly's life cycle to come about via random mutation or selection. The whole program has to be built into the egg when the butterfly builds the egg.
How did eggs evolve?
Either they work or end of species.
What, a species got the mutant urge to drop eggs for a few million years until a fully function egg accidentally popped out one day?
The Evolution of the Flying Bird - Not: There's no path where dragging a couple of non-functioning wings around for a few million years would give the predecessor bird an advantage as our theory states things evolve. In fact, it would be a sitting duck to the predators of prey.
A bird is a complete package. The weight to power ratio has to be correct. There has to be control services to alter the flight path. And the little fella has to know how to operate the whole thing.
Man couldn't figure out how to fly, we copied the bird. As many a brave soul found out; sticking a couple wings on and jumping off a cliff doesn't get the job done.
Four Billion Years - Rock to Man: That's how long we're given to get this whole operation done, according to the white cloaks. Sounds like a long time ... let's consider.
Four Billion Years; their timetable, not mine. The whole Theory of Evolution currently rest on “hypothetical biochemistry” science. Hypothetical is defined as, "based primarily on surmise rather than adequate evidence." Surmise means, "infer from incomplete evidence."
I have as much faith in evolutionary scientist's time suppositions as I do in the rest of their theories which are in a continual state of flux.
"New theories are emerging, diverse viewpoints are finding encouragement, and there are several competing hypotheses regarding prebiotic chemical systems. New data, new observations, and new techniques are required."(1)
The human body starts out as one cell and grows into a 100 trillion cell entity able to reproduce itself within a few years.
Flipping a coin, it took me five tries to come up with two tails in a row. How many times would I have to flip a coin to come up with 100 trillion tails in a row? That pales in simplicity compared to the human body were each cell is a living, functioning part of the whole with a dedicated obligation.
Our rate of advancement would have to average out to 25,000 cells per year. The whole Plant and Animal Kingdom would have to get up early in the morning and work on evolving - they wouldn't even have time to eat.
Each of the 100 trillion cells in our body is a fully functioning biological computer.
And yet, there's no evidence of anything evolving anywhere; "When we descend to details, we cannot prove that a single species has changed; nor can we prove that the supposed changes are beneficial, which is the groundwork of the theory." Charles Darwin
The Theory of Evolution is based on a provable observation, the tremendous adaptability observed in all forms of life. It's then assumed that species, through adaptation, evolve into other species.
In contrast, most of mathematical science is based on proved theories; the proof is usually presented with the theory.
Math, with 100% provability, proves that the Theory of Evolution is impossible.
The odds of the lottery demand, and show, millions of misses for each hit. Some drawings have no winner, but still millions of misses. Over a range of winners, we see a proportional increase of the necessary misses. Math Happy :)
In our mutant lottery of life, we have no misses. Now there are a few fossils that some proclaim to be an intermediate stage between two species. Not gonna work! The best odds speculated for the theory are far greater than the lottery. Math demands, but doesn't get, a massive amount of misses (far greater than the lottery) for each assumed species advancement. Math Sad :(
Don't get too excited about a fossil someone proclaims to be a missing link. Think back to our lottery example; one (or a few) winner with millions of misses. The odds we're dealing with (from rock to man); the earth wouldn't be able to hold the required missing fossils.
Throw math away, or throw the theory away; you can't have both.
Missing Failed States:
odds of mutation = 107 (we're not taking into consideration the fact that mutational changes are adverse and not beneficial)
100 trillion cells in the human body - there will be a few mutant cells in some folks.
Not much happened there. Lucky dude needs some related mutational changes if he wants to grow a leg or eyeball (evolve).
Something noticeable would happen here but nothing close to an evolutionary change.
For Lucky Dude to evolve, he needs more related mutational changes. Trouble is; if we try to go for four or more related mutational changes, the earth wouldn't be able to hold all the Unlucky Dudes.
All this for a minor mutational change.
Now consider how many Unlucky Dudes we need to go from our little one-cell Lucky Dude to a 100 trillion cell Lucky Guy.
Then we have to consider how many Unlucky Dudes we have to see in the fossil recored for all forms of life on earth to evolve from the first one-cell dude.
Scientist have reduced the inconceivable odds of DNA popping into existence with theories of DNA precursors of RNA, or even more simple structures.
Not so fast!
I could take a bus to the station; or I could take a bus halfway, and take a cab the rest of the way. The distance is the same.
Evolutionist have theorized that the odds of this DNA precursor, though very big, could be played out in their established time frame of about four billion years.
But that doesn't get you all the way; rock to man.
For sake of argument; I'll give you the imaginary prebiotic dudes and the simple odds, but you have to finish the calculation.
(1/prebiotic dude odds) x (1/prebiotic to one-cell odds)
By theory, reducing atmosphere(4), the prebiotic dudes can't exist today. So, we still have to consider the odds of going from the imaginary prebiotic dude to a real one-cell entity.
Were not going to consider the fact that one-cell dude needs to evolve from a reducing atmosphere guy to a oxygen atmosphere guy.
Guess what, we're back to a really big scary number that could never take place in a puny four billion years.
Oh, almost forgot; the "live" thing. For this whole thing to work; somewhere along the way, something actually has to come alive and start doing all the things little one-cell dudes like to do.
To be mathematically correct, we have to consider the odds of this thing actually coming alive.
(1/prebiotic dude odds) x (1/prebiotic dude comes alive odds) x (1/prebiotic to one-cell odds)
It's alive now but we'll have to start all over if it can't reproduce.
(1/prebiotic dude odds) x (1/prebiotic dude comes alive odds) x (1/prebiotic dude can reproduce odds) x (1/prebiotic to one-cell odds)
And to finish the formula; rock to man:
(1/prebiotic dude odds) x (1/prebiotic dude comes alive odds) x (1/prebiotic dude can reproduce odds) x (1/prebiotic to one-cell odds) x (1/one-cell to 100 trillion cell guy odds)
Haven't even considered the Plant Kingdom and the that all forms of life on earth have to be doing all this evolving in parallel and the odds of all this happening in parallel.
All this and no evidence in the fossil record?
I think we're going to need some more theories.
The party's over; turn out the lights and go home. You can stay and play if you want, but please don't call it science.
(1) NASA SP-530 An Exobiological Strategy for Mars Exploration Prepared by Exobiology Program Office, NASA HQ April 1995 ; NASA- EXOBIOLOGY - A Program of NASA's Solar System Exploration Division - Written by NASA Exobiology Program Manager: Michael A. Meyer
(2) Hypothetical types of biochemistry
(3) Prebiodites: I made the word up. A Prebiodite is one imaginary prebiotic evolution dude.
(4)"From Primordial Soup to the Prebiotic Beach", An interview with exobiology pioneer, Dr. Stanley L. Miller, University of California San Diego, By Sean Henahan, Access Excellence - was Lead Scientist: NASA Specialized Center of Research and Training