Does Evolution have a - Chance

Comments on the Video 'Does evolution have a - chance' Link

Mike Riddle.

This is close to being the worst example of manipulation I have seen on the AiG-webpage.
Riddle tries to disprove evolution by leaving out evolution. A typical straw-man argument.

There is not one single piece of relevant information in the video. Actually it can only have been made by a person who knows absolutely nothing about biology in general and evolution in particular.
(Leaving out the possibility that Riddle simply is a lier)

First: The picture is an insult. Evolution is nothing like chimpazees writing a sonnet by Shakespeare.

The text includes several flaws. Basically, it starts in the wrong place. Proteins and DNA were probably NOT the starting points of evolution. Google 'RNA-world' to find the real story.

Here is a few more (First, Second ... is referring to the paragraph 'Making Mathematics Painless'):

First: Just because 20 amino acids are used in life does not mean that it could not be otherwise.
Second: Certain clay minerals are capable of sorting between left hand and right hand amino acids.
Third: All proteins comes in many different versions. There is no single ’correct’ order for any protein. Two completely different proteins with no sequence homology at all, can have the same function!
Sixth: Any protecting membrane will do, it need not be the cell-membrane we know today.
Seventh: Natural selection will work on any entity that reproduces itself. A self-replicating molecule will be enough for evolution to start.

The ’Human body assemble’ calculations are irrelevant.
First: Why a Human? Why not a Shrew or a Blue Whale? They have the same overall body-plan as humans (because of evolution).
The description of assembling cells that are already there is nonsense.
Evolution works by taking what is already there and modifying it. Start with a simple tube, with water flowing through, nutrients taken up, and waste excreted by diffusion. Modify the various parts of it and you end up with Mouth, Gullet, Stomach, Small intestine, Colon and Anus (and probably a few more parts).

And look at the creation story. How much sense does it make?
Adam was made of dust (probably mostly silicon oxide) and then came to live.
This means that every single molecule of 'Dust-Adam' had to be changes into organic compounds.
But then, what was the point of making him of dust in the first place? Why not just say 'Let there be Man'? It makes absolutely no sense.
Eve was made from his rib - OK here at least we start with organic material. But much too less of it, so again some additional miracle is needed. Why not just 'Let there be Woman'?

Reading the Bible as a myth, it makes at least some kind of sense.
Genesis 1 and 2 should be regarded as two seperate creation myths. In the first everything is created by the word of God. Not so in the second one (starting appoximately at Genesis 2:4). Here Adam is made from dust, Eve from a rib, and all the animals are 'formed', indicating that they are made from some kind of pre-existing material.

The video tries to establish that protein sequences cannot have come along by chance, because the probability is too small.
Riddle calculates the probability of a protein of 100 amino acids being constructed by chance and ends up with a number so small that it rules out the probability that this would occur by chance.
Calculations are correct - but irrelevant.
It builds on the assumption that only one single amino acid sequence would do to form a specific protein. But whenever you sequence the same protein from two different (not too closely related) organisms, you end up with different sequences. Evidently a protein can vary a lot in its amino acid sequence, and still have the same function. Actually in some proteins, examples have been found that are so different that it is very difficult to find any similarity at all. And still the proteins have the same function. Look here for confirmation of this.
This fact makes the calculations presented irrelevant and misleading.
Also when a protein with a specific function makes its first appearance, it is most likely very inefficient. This opens up for even more possible variation in sequence. There are so many other ways to be bad at doing something, than there is to be good at it.
The 'Handedness' problem have been solved otherwise. Certain clay minerals have been shown to sort between differently handed amino acids, resulting i an environment with only one sort.

Mike Riddle is a mathematician. He should know how to be careful in such calculations.
Either Riddle knows what he is doing, in which case it is no better than lying.
Or he does not know what he is doing, and the AiG should not use him.

During the video, he also lures you into thinking that 'Origin of Life' and 'The First Cell' is the very same thing. It is not. look here.

He also calculates how long it would take to assemble the human body one cell at the time. I honestly never understood why he does this. It is so utterly irrelevant to anything having to do with evolution that it can only be seen as pure manipulation.