Evolution Cannot Be the Result of Random Mutations
Vladislav Běhal
I can belive to miracles but not to improbable things.
G.K. Chesterton
Today´s error of neo-darwinists consists in the fact that they do not
realize that 600 million years is a time period too short for an extension of
DNA of multicellular organisms including almost three billion base pairs
and a simultaneous random mutation process producing functional
proteins that would subsequently be able to ensure the organization of all
complex forms of life, also in a random manner. The way of life evolution
considered by neo-darwinists is irreal in the span of the real time that is
available. In order that vertebrates could evolve to produce primates, their
embryos would have to mutate at a rate of at least ten base pairs in average
per each generation in the genome region that does not code for any
protein. As, simultaneously, several tens of base pairs would also mutate
in the genome region coding for essential metabolic processes, the
newborn offspring would not survive. The evolution thus cannot be the
result of random mutations.
Recently, the question of life evolution on Earth has become a hot issue
as a result of doubts cast on the concept of evolution based on random
mutations of organismal DNA (neo-darwinism). The opposers of neo-darwinistic
view argue against the randomness of evolution. They especially point out that
the theory includes discrepancies that can be explained by „intelligent design“.
The latter idea is refused by atheists who argue against the involvement of the
belief in God in the concept of natural sciences. What are the objections against
neo-darwinism?
Darwin thinks that the evolution results from gradual genetic changes of
organisms and those changes that are advantageous for survival are fixed via
natural selection. The evolution must have taken place since God would have to
be a dilettante to create every species separately. The natural selection is also
functioning. The question is what we consider to be „gradual changes“. The
discovery of DNA, that is the essence of heredity, offered an explanation. DNA is
coding for proteins, mainly for enzymes, that control life processes. A change of
hereditary properties, i.e. the evolution, can occur only as a result of a change of
DNA - the so-called mutation. A triplet of nucleotides that can be formed by four
different bases (adenine, guanine, cytosine and thymine) bound to deoxyribose
and phosphate is coding for one amino acid. Enzymes and other proteins consist
of these amino acids and their function depends on the exact order of amino
acids in the protein molecule. The order of amino acids in the protein molecule
depends on the order of nucleotide bases in the corresponding part of DNA. If
one base or two bases in a triplet are changed, a different amino acid is
consequently coded for by the triplet. If such a change does not occur in a DNA
region that codes for an essential enzyme activity, it can be conserved and kept
for future generations. By accumulation of such mutations, theoretically, a new
1
enzyme can be created. This event can be considered to represent the basic
evolutionary step. By combining several tens of newly created enzymes and
proteins a new structure could be formed, for instance the flagellum of a sperm or
a bacterium, or the synthase of an antibiotic. A further accumulation of new
enzymes would be responsible for the formation of new cell types, new organs,
etc. The neo-darwinistic theory that prevails at present explains the appearance
of new enzymes and proteins, including the evolution from single-cell organisms
to man, as a result of random mutations in diploid precursors of gametes and of a
random transfer of transposable DNA regions in the genome.
The evolution based on random mutations affecting organismal DNA,
however, is in contradiction to the law of probability, which is a mathematical law.
The appearance of a new enzyme including 330 amino acids means a mutation
process affecting 1000 nucleotide bases and ensure that they are located in a
strict order. The probability of appearance of such a mutation is 1:4 1000, which is
equal to the value of 1:10600, that is extremely low. The probability of creation of a
new structure consisting of 30 proteins by the random mutation process is equal
to 1:1020000. The organism created by such a mutation process would not have
an advantage compared to the other organisms since the organism would be
fully functional not sooner than after the last mutation would occur. If an
exchange of bases in DNA takes place during replication, either in the embryonic
or somatic cell, the cell is able to correct the error. As a result, a mutation in the
embryonic cell that can be conserved is observed after 1 billion of cell divisions.
At present, mainly the random regroupement (reshuffling) of genes inside
genome is thought to be the source of creation of new genes. The idea that a
new effective organ could arise by random regroupement of the genetic material
that is coding for it seems to be absurd. In this way, various genetic defects
originate. The idea that a writer could continue a novel by mere insertion of
random words and groups of letters between the chapters and sentences and
then would cut them off randomly and inserted them again between other
paragraphs and sentences cannot be accepted. A nice house with a complex
inside facilities can be constructed only according to an intelligent design and not
by a random reshuffling of the material and rearrangement without a fixed plan.
The random mutations act in nature, otherwise races and varieties would
not exist. However, the existence of races and variations can mostly be attributed
to the human activity. The frequency of variations can be assessed, for instance,
from the frequency of appearance of white crows, in which the gene for the
enzyme tyrosinase mutated to interrupt the metabolic pathway leading to the
production of melanin. Most conserved mutations result in a damage to the
organism.
Another problem related to evolution is the extension of DNA chain.
Recently, the genomes of man and other animals and organisms have been
sequenced and the numbers of base pairs (bp) in their DNAs established.
Whereas simple eukaryotic organisms have DNA consisting of several millions of
base pairs, the genome of Drosophila fly has 180 million base pairs and the
genomes of the dog, mouse and primates including man have 2.4, 2.6 and 2.9
billion base pairs, respectively. It is evident that the question of DNA elongation is
2
crucial for evolution since, if there are no redundant nucleotides in the genome,
they cannot mutate. Life on the Earth appeared some 3.8 billion years ago. For
more than 3 billion years, only bacteria and blue algae colonized the Earth and
produced oxygen. In the Cambrian, i.e. 570 million years ago, an enormous
development of life started and, within the next 5-10 million years, 35 out of 40
known branches appeared on the Earth. In case organisms having the genome
only several million bp long were living 600 million years ago, then the DNA chain
had to increase by almost 3 billion bp, which represents a rate of increase of 5
bases per year in average and about 10 bases per generation. If the first
vertebrates whose genome was not bigger than 1 billion base pairs appeared
400 million years ago, then the rate is again 10 bases per generation. In case the
difference between the dog and a primate makes some 500 million bp, then the
difference between the first mammal that appeared some 100 million years ago
is even greater and, consequently, mammals had to elongate their genome even
more rapidly, at least by 10 bp per generation. Nothing like that has ever been
observed in nature. In addition, the newly formed nucleotides would have to
mutate so as to code for functional enzymes and proteins. As mentioned above,
such a probability is negligible. The error of neo-darwinists consists in the fact
that they do not realize that a time span of 600 million years is too short to
represent the time long enough to evolve life in all its richness and variations
through random mutations. Randomness and imaginary millions of years are
used as Deus ex Machina in situations where their conclusions are contradictory
to the findings of natural sciences. Their belief in the dogma of evolution through
random mutations is so strong that they do not see that, simply, it is not true. In
textbooks written by top molecular biologists one can read that, due to
repair mechanisms, no changes in the mammalian genome occur and that
the transformation of a man to primate through accumulation of random
mutations is a nonsense, however, they accept a similar development in
the opposite direction.
According to darwinists man evolved from a common ancestor with big
apes. The difference between the human DNA sequence and that of chimpanzee
is they say 1,6 % which is 50 milions bp that would have to mutate during
transition of the human ancestor common with that of the apes within 5 million
years. Taking into account a generation time of 10 years, the rate should be 100
bp per generation. Simultaneously, a total of several thausends bp would have to
mutate in the part of the genome coding for functional enzymes, which would
result in the death of embryos and extinction of the species. Recent findings
obtained in the area of molecular biology of the cell suggest that evolution could
take place only via mutations of the cells from which embryonic cells are
produced. The evolution using random mutations would require a mutation rate
of 10 mutations per generation. As several tens of bases would mutate in the
region coding for essential proteins, no viable individuals would be born. As a
result, random mutations cannot be responsible for evolution.
The problem concerning man is not how his body was created but if he is
only a more developed animal or a being endowed with an immortal soul by
which his value surpasses that of other creatures and the quality of the body is
3
not important. If a human being has the Creator, he/she does not decide what is
good or bad but is responsible for his/her behaviour to Him. Darwin´s followers
made the value of a human being relative, which stimulated the development of
racism. E. Haeckel said: „Germans separated from the common ape basis most
of all. Psychologically, the lower races are closer to animals than to civilized
Europeans. It is therefore necessary to recognize that their lives have a different
value.“ Nietzche´s doctrine about Übermensch, about the right of stronger to
suppress and exploit the weaker, about the right of stronger nations to wipe out
weaker nations and races also stemmed from the atheistic darwinism.
Neo-darwinism has been generally accepted by scientists and, therefore,
it will take some time before the theory is abandoned. As Max Planck wrote: „The
truth iv science never triumphs but its adversaries die out.“ The way and the
mechanisms of evolution are not known. Scientists of the 21st century should be
able to solve this problem. However, as a prerequisite, they should abandon the
false track of thinking represented by neo-darwinism.
4