Mentions
Extended reach
Total likes
Video views
AI synopsis
The reactions demonstrate a highly skeptical attitude, with many posts asserting the improbability of natural protein synthesis using words like 'mathematically impossible' and highlighting odds like 10^-77. The tone is dismissive, emphasizing perceived flaws and challenging the relevance of the study, which reflects a dismissive and confrontational engagement rather than genuine curiosity or consensus-building.
Most posts strongly dispute the findings, emphasizing the improbability of protein formation without intervention, often labeling it as mathematically impossible.
The discussions show some curiosity, but much of it revolves around rebuttals rather than genuine engagement or deep understanding.
Many comments dismiss the research or make superficial references, indicating low involvement with the details of the study.
Users seem largely convinced that the findings undermine evolutionary explanations, but the overall tone suggests skepticism rather than acknowledgment of scientific significance.
(10) إحتمالية تَكُون/انطواء بروتين ليُصبح فعّال وظيفياً (بطريقة عشوائية) تحتاج فترة (عدد مرات من المحاولات) تصل الى 10 مرفوع للقوة 77 ، بمعنى، ضع رقم 1 وجنبه 77 صفراً ! المصدر Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds https://t.co/RyEfsr9mdr
@redeemedYIMBY Sources:
@onlychrispark This paper https://t.co/FQ7FNOSRu0 found that the odds of a beneficial mutation are 1 in 10^64, thats a 1 with 64 0's. This is so low that not even billions of years could create one beneficial mutation even if you consider all the bacteria on earth mutating for this cause.
@annex1onemli https://t.co/AcIQGq7hM2 https://t.co/uWeW1EqiSi
@LOlsonKingsFan @onlychrispark Excellent, thank you Lucas! There is also not enough evolutionary time for natural selection working on random mutations to produce the necessary protein folds needed for new body plans. https://t.co/WFhW19jlBC
@HJarsz @MeMaraCass @NotEvolution1 Here's a study addressing the probabilities. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
This video deconstructs one of the most common questions against Intelligent Design (ID) Theory: 'Where is the ID model?' It examines scientific validity and explores axioms and principles of ID, comparing it to…
This video examines the impossible task assigned by naturalists to the assumed mechanism of evolution through random variation and natural selection. Despite vast timeframes and countless organisms, the likelihood of…
@Melanie33720945 @elothean @michaer27 @BAKing87432611 @AtheistPhoenix This is just a small segment of the probabilities argument. Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds - PubMed https://t.co/Mk28d7uDEg
@Modalsurrealism @jackhorner32 @BaptistJoshua_ @DivinelyDesined Happy to burst your bubble. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@Melanie33720945 @KennethHam26159 https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@MobiusDick @garyandglendah1 @darwintojesus Short response for now. Protein synthesis is extraordinarily rare, like not enough time in the universe rare. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd Peptides don't form proteins and cannot perform the functions needed for life.
@MbvBaryonix @StoshxJosh @JesseTheBug @jmthok @Andercot Speaking of absurdly numbers and improbabilities. The probability of a single,small functional protein fold is 10-⁷⁷. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@BTHBcRMY @TokarevEnjoyer @SarahisCensored @lilmoemusic 1. the LTEE. 2. the fossil record displaying punctuated equilibrium. look it up yourself 3. https://t.co/U8ysAZhpBY
@KlinkBart https://t.co/XZPdYbgYeM
@Barney02073101 @TheHistoryGuy07 @AiG Sure. Just the other day https://t.co/zJaAzrVAnP a dozen.or so. I don't have the time to.spoonn feed you everything, but here's one to start. Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds - PubMed https://t.co/z9hEukfbaD
@Just1Atheist @WComing78932759 @joeandthegiant @AgainstAtheismX https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@EvanGor93154017 @OfficialLawO @Lilith_Atheist Technically impossible just for a single protein. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@Pseudomastix @darwintojesus Two separate things. Protein synthesis is here. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@AranenZen @neutrinomoon @DivinelyDesined That's not levinthal. It's based on measurable enzymatic function. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@DavidCamham1 @netripy @IthoughtiwasU @AtheistPhoenix Here's an important study in the field showing the probability of protein synthesis (extremely rare) PhD in biochemical engineering at Cal. Tech and post doc work at Cambridge. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@LiberAtheist @IHTAcast @DivinelyDesined If we granted homochiral aminos, and perfect condition, even the protein synthesis is technically impossible, even for small ish proteins. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@JohnConnor_US @Alpenostrand @konstructivizm Axe, D. D. (2004). Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds. Journal of Molecular Biology, 341(5), 1295–1315. doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2004.06.058
@WhatYouThinkIT1 @gCMG_Obv @jessicaschick @hookskat https://t.co/87LTpqMM2G A protein of 150 amino acids (a typical length) has 20 possible amino acids at each position (since there are 20 standard amino acids). Total possible sequences = 20^150 ≈ 10^195 (since 20^150 = (2^4.32)^150 ≈ 2^648 ≈ 10^195). This represents the
@Ausbloke93 You buffoon! Maybe you ought to ask questions and learn a bit before strutting around like you know anything. It's obvious to everyone but you that you're a dumbass. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF https://t.co/IlGVnLBmEG https://t.co/ghg0EAaE5a
@MightBTroubleFF @ProfBrianCox The odds of a single SMALL protein synthesizing de novo is 10-⁷⁷. Simplest life on earth has 1384 unique proteins with proteins that are on average 3x larger than the study below. The odds are beyond astronomical https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@HJarsz @MeMaraCass @NotEvolution1 Here's a study addressing the probabilities. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@Deathdestroy300 @0x9212ce55 @extradeadjcb @eiritana That study doesn’t look at the chances of creating a new protein fold. It looks at the chances of creating a protein that can bind to ATP. That’s useless in an organism. The 10^77 number is well researched. And it account for ANY functional fold. https://t.co/U8ysAZgRMq
@live4footy @JustMe_D_ Sorry, forgot the link. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd Happy to walk you through every step of Abiogenesis and show you the shortcomings
@live4footy @JustMe_D_ Sorry, forgot the link. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd Happy to walk you through every step of Abiogenesis and show you the shortcomings
@tw_Rosebud @r930596 @4lc4p @chicfryrice https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@MSScienceWizard @grok @WilliamMcgibney Several studies address probability. .https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@ChallengeBelief @michaer27 @downagaondownah @AgainstAtheismX https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd This study show the probability of a single small protein forming by chance is 10^-77. This is beyond what is considered by mathematicians to be impossible in our universe (~10^-50) There isn't a single aspect of abiogenesis that has been shown remotely
@taturman @Tekyolbilim (bakabilirsin -> axe, “estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds”, journal of molecular biology, 2004). bu genetik düzeyde evrimi çökerten somut bir delil.
@AekartzDefense @logarithmsuckz @mariorestini @dystopiabreaker The number of organisms ever has been calculated several times and is roughly agreed on. The protein probability comes from this paper, but also a long standing issue known as the Levinthal Paradox. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@redeemedYIMBY Sources:
@MackyMus_24 @_Ancient_Way_ @Questergirl @DrFrankTurek Here's one. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@MTrued @MrHoudini4555 @AiG Yes, I did all the math here, let me know if you think anything is off (and be specific if you do): What the paper (https://t.co/FQ7FNOSRu0) is referring to be extremely improbably (1 in 10e77), is the odds of mutations being able to make specific changes to the DNA that would
@Tried_MyBest @don_duan7 @noahreineke @AgainstAtheismX RNA world is bunk, even Abiogenesis proponents agree. Makes no sense and no evidence supports it. We have understanding and studies of the probability of protein synthesis, and it's mathematically impossible for our universe. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@lowtierhuman @StevesRawMind @Eobaad @SlenderSkeptic @iamAtheistGirl Here's a paper on the probability of small functional proteins forming in favorable conditions. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@PraetorPrimus @stormcapitol @Chortling_Man @TheBroosh @Pavelnadolski @willybamboo @Lilith_Atheist Undirected protein synthesis means basically formed in nature without the interference of an intelligent actor. Even with many cheats, they still can't do it without full out synthetic processes. Here's the paper that shows the improbability. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@LatFilosof @hookskat Forgot to cite a source: https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP
@DreamsTurnDark @RealDex99 @RicoKRS @Lilith_Atheist Here's the study detailing the improbability of functional proteins synthesis. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@extremelyright1 @logarithmsuckz @HockleyTyson Sorry. Study- https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@Corvus3110 @logarithmsuckz @AndyWesterson @coretoom @AgainstAtheismX We can. Below is a study showing the probability of protein formation. Small, simple protein is 10^-77. The limit of what is mathematically possible in our universe is ~10^-50. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@ScienceQriosity @GregCampNC @oiler3535 @ToriatheistTori Here’s one: https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP
@e_considine @David32856757 @StephenCMeyer https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF https://t.co/xppTd5yfKs
@KingOfSalt4 @BishopJaxi This study https://t.co/FQ7FNOSRu0 did an analysis of the probability of forming a functional group on a protein (the part of the protein that executes a function) and found the odds of one forming by random chance are 1 in 10^64
@tpawap This one's better, with a result of 1:10⁷⁷ https://t.co/go5sF1yHXv
@ChaseBrowe32432 @DeryaTR_ It's based on a couple of known complexities of protein folding. The study below arrived that that specific number, but the problem was previously known as Levinthal Paradox> Paper>https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF https://t.co/fJNFARb0sL
@disgustipated42 There is no such thing as extraterrestrials; there is not enough time in the universe for two independent abiogenesis events. https://t.co/brdFrNIHYV
@JustinCPorter @onlychrispark @Thedon9994 https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd If not chance, then what?
@onlychrispark this paper: https://t.co/FQ7FNOSRu0 found that the odds of generating one functional domain from a random mutation are 1 in 10 vigintillion (1 in 10^64 exponent) or: 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 For comparison, the
@Conserberal @Pius_imue @Robbservations2 @darwintojesus What would suffice as evidence for you? How about the improbability of a beneficial mutation? this paper https://t.co/FQ7FNOTpjy found that the odds of generating one functional domain from a random mutation are 1 in 10 vigintillion (1 in 10^64 exponent) or: 1 in
@onlychrispark This paper https://t.co/FQ7FNOSRu0 found that the odds of a beneficial mutation are 1 in 10^64, thats a 1 with 64 0's. This is so low that not even billions of years could create one beneficial mutation even if you consider all the bacteria on earth mutating for this cause.
@gijoe6pack @umbranoid @wendelltalks this paper https://t.co/FQ7FNOSRu0 found that the odds of generating one functional domain from a random mutation are 1 in 10 vigintillion (1 in 10^64 exponent) or: 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 For comparison, the
@L_Alving_Jessep @autocorrect2_0 https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@L_Alving_Jessep @autocorrect2_0 Pulled the book. Start here: Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds - ScienceDirect
@icarus62 @autocorrect2_0 https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@alfbennymedia @onlychrispark Alf. I'll give you one example then call it a night. Since the discovery of the DNA molecule ND is done. There is not enough evolutionary time for natural selection working on random mutations to create the protein folds necessary for new body plans. https://t.co/WFhW19jlBC They
@LOlsonKingsFan @onlychrispark Excellent, thank you Lucas! There is also not enough evolutionary time for natural selection working on random mutations to produce the necessary protein folds needed for new body plans. https://t.co/WFhW19jlBC
@horusrage @1pckt @AkinyemiG82 @downs1nthehouse @Wolfpak561 @zypisfy @kali8989 @SecularSmurf @_Truthster @The_Real_BiM @Bumpalump99 @KuriousChristos @Cern_lXXl @depth_ocean_ @gerald_pay41751 @A_Damned_mk2 @kim_because @Melanie33720945 @FakemonSohga @lintpop @Raven4212 @SparrowsFlying @jimgaz @AdorablePodcast @TakethatCt @ASK_Esq29 @edielizzard1 @edgy_knife @Ah_Science @merhart2112 @SeamusOBrien42 @ArchLuminous @scottstocker4 @Covidtalk1 @MephistoTabern1 @BrianNazarenus @WooWooSpaceJew @voidalEntropy @pray2pesci @D1scoJerrys @itisjustmebabe @Takethatjoe @TXgalLucy @DeanoMartino1 @rubblebubb15764 @MindfulDamage @CryLeftists @Russian04239821 @willsworldview Well, here's science telling you just a small single protein is not possible to occur by chance. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF BTW, 10^-50 is scientifically considered the limit of probability in our universe.
@Just1Atheist @DixitEtFecit @NotEvolution1 Here's one dealing with protein synthesis. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@theosib2 @Psychobabble66 @Alvamiga @laughchem This study is not about computer modeling, but experimental identification of functional proteins. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@theosib2 @Psychobabble66 @Alvamiga @laughchem Probability of protein formation. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@cpchambe @onlychrispark Which would you like to start with? Here's one on the probability of a small functional protein. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@cpchambe @onlychrispark Which would you like to start with? Here's one on the probability of a small functional protein. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@WeirdAlRoker @PastorSZ @SwipeWright @SpikeDiet It's not disingenuous, it's based on peer reviewed science and understanding of protein folding mechanisms. Near infinite is a nonsense concept. Here's a good video on Levinthal's paradox which was proposed 69 years ago. https://t.co/fJNFARb0sL https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
RT @SDAFS56788141: @bex_fur @BineaToday @hugh_bothwell @JMIglesias7 @New_Apologetic @MucusMucous1 @Sicut_Lupus @Emperor_Mollari @BagORichar…
@bex_fur @BineaToday @hugh_bothwell @JMIglesias7 @New_Apologetic @MucusMucous1 @Sicut_Lupus @Emperor_Mollari @BagORichards @kester_lowers @Raven4212 @DementedHuman @ZenBuddhistBear @StillDizzy2 @Jeff_J_Morgan @PatricktheB @MDH_UAR @michael43081938 @1pckt @IHateGod427 @Wolfpak561 @SecularSmurf @TJMair @pickledcaliph1 @TBRagsdale1 @Cern_lXXl @mirandaisrisen @RossGilroy @randomizer88996 @jools6691 @proundpapaof3 @faefriend69 @rubblebubb15764 @CeCeBearian @JustUnderReal @icannotdie666 @BrianNazarenus @MichaelSteidel @randolf828 @IrisB42744268 @TertiusIV @joejoe419723966 @timmbosliceeee @Covidtalk1 @MilesMosley666 @orna_verum @badgervindaloo @RalbrechtTroy @RachelT921 Here's facts. Probability (rather improbability) of protein synthesis. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@faith_eater @OlY3llo @deusinferno3141 @reef103 @Godsspear011 @MichaeldeBoer18 @ShiroSpirit @AtheistPhoenix Don't be a child. Bring receipts. Here's mine for protein synthesis. Curious, what is the Christian AI bot? never heard of it. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@raycerapozaR2 @Rjinswand @guy_eye97290 @autocorrect2_0 Here's the study that backs that. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF Simplest life we have ever seen requires473 unique, separate and specifically functional proteins. Expecting something simpler is like expecting a functional car to have one part.
@DiphyCue @patprendergast3 @spasaymoostard @SlaveOfTheLamb @NotEvolution1 This study (and others like it) that examine the known limitations of protein folding. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@NHoomans @DementedHuman @RossGilroy @Wolfpak561 @StillDizzy2 @MucusMucous1 @Emperor_Mollari @Jeff_J_Morgan @BineaToday @BagORichards @bex_fur @1pckt @TheGodCookie @hugh_bothwell @SecularSmurf @michael43081938 @kester_lowers @pickledcaliph1 @TBRagsdale1 @Cern_lXXl @mirandaisrisen @Sicut_Lupus @randomizer88996 @jools6691 @proundpapaof3 @PatricktheB @faefriend69 @rubblebubb15764 @CeCeBearian @JustUnderReal @icannotdie666 @BrianNazarenus @MichaelSteidel @randolf828 @IrisB42744268 @TertiusIV @joejoe419723966 @timmbosliceeee @Covidtalk1 @Raven4212 @IHateGod427 @TJMair @MilesMosley666 @orna_verum @badgervindaloo @RalbrechtTroy @RachelT921 @th1rt3en_TM @RKBAinCA @ghostofJmadison Yes. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@RossGilroy @Wolfpak561 @StillDizzy2 @MucusMucous1 @Emperor_Mollari @Jeff_J_Morgan @BineaToday @BagORichards @bex_fur @DementedHuman @1pckt @TheGodCookie @hugh_bothwell @SecularSmurf @michael43081938 @kester_lowers @pickledcaliph1 @TBRagsdale1 @Cern_lXXl @mirandaisrisen @Sicut_Lupus @randomizer88996 @jools6691 @proundpapaof3 @PatricktheB @faefriend69 @rubblebubb15764 @CeCeBearian @JustUnderReal @icannotdie666 @BrianNazarenus @MichaelSteidel @randolf828 @IrisB42744268 @TertiusIV @joejoe419723966 @timmbosliceeee @Covidtalk1 @Raven4212 @IHateGod427 @TJMair @MilesMosley666 @orna_verum @badgervindaloo @RalbrechtTroy @RachelT921 @th1rt3en_TM @RKBAinCA @ghostofJmadison Probability of protein formation is beyond 2hat is possible in this universe. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@Unapologet26919 @TakeThatHistory @Flaffenbam @NuckChorris16 @Galcondude @JaTapps @warpox @Christgodtweet @FEARGODBRO @Cleisthenes5 @NoScienceDenial @JayConcerto @spikeinthemidge @HankStern2 @Melanie33720945 @1pckt @DoubleDoubleJon @TheColossis @Thedukeistheman @laughchem @RayOwen27617272 @Atheism_is_Dead @JordanBassior @CrispyCurry @andyguy @RFirethief @RockAndAnchor @umfpt @rkdoctr @PainesReason @Jan57860130 @ScientiaPercept @hugh_bothwell @Setophaga9 @fairytalejedi @malo_j @Onychom @bonjourfoii @adrianturner01 @PaulDubuisson @PaulVCooper1 @Mel08230309 @atheism_cringe @nutriweh @SariellaHerself @Conserberal @splendira @rmbctious2 @BenefactrChurch Protein formation. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@Melanie33720945 @TakeThatHistory @Flaffenbam @NuckChorris16 @Galcondude @Unapologet26919 @JaTapps @REPENTAVOIDHELL @warpox @Christgodtweet @FEARGODBRO @Cleisthenes5 @NoScienceDenial @JayConcerto @spikeinthemidge @HankStern2 @1pckt @DoubleDoubleJon @TheColossis @Thedukeistheman @laughchem @RayOwen27617272 @Atheism_is_Dead @JordanBassior @CrispyCurry @andyguy @RFirethief @RockAndAnchor @umfpt @rkdoctr @PainesReason @Jan57860130 @ScientiaPercept @hugh_bothwell @Setophaga9 @fairytalejedi @malo_j @Onychom @bonjourfoii @adrianturner01 @PaulDubuisson @PaulVCooper1 @Mel08230309 @atheism_cringe @nutriweh @SariellaHerself @Conserberal @splendira @rmbctious2 @BenefactrChurch Highlighting the scale of biology and probabilities of certain events occuring. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF https://t.co/7W4I0DTVHd
@Unapologet26919 @Melanie33720945 @TakeThatHistory @Flaffenbam @NuckChorris16 @Galcondude @JaTapps @REPENTAVOIDHELL @warpox @Christgodtweet @FEARGODBRO @Cleisthenes5 @NoScienceDenial @JayConcerto @spikeinthemidge @HankStern2 @1pckt @DoubleDoubleJon @TheColossis @Thedukeistheman @laughchem @RayOwen27617272 @Atheism_is_Dead @JordanBassior @CrispyCurry @andyguy @RFirethief @RockAndAnchor @umfpt @rkdoctr @PainesReason @Jan57860130 @ScientiaPercept @hugh_bothwell @Setophaga9 @fairytalejedi @malo_j @Onychom @bonjourfoii @adrianturner01 @PaulDubuisson @PaulVCooper1 @Mel08230309 @atheism_cringe @nutriweh @SariellaHerself @Conserberal @splendira @rmbctious2 @BenefactrChurch Here's a study shoeing the probability of a single protein forming. It applies to both abiogenesis and the de novo creation of modern proteins. This is based on our confirmed understanding of how proteins fold and the chal
@C43DTX @onlychrispark No, it's actually based on what we know about protein folding. There have been numerous studies on the issue (see below) and we now use distributed supercomputing and Alphafold AI by Google to help better understand the process. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@Coffey3C1 @creationnews Please read the following paper which my cited video is based on. Then, hopefully you'd see flaws in your arguments, e.g. the video isn't trying to build a protein with "a given purpose" as you falsely claim. https://t.co/oNUT4DmfKB
@Bronzedbeard @FillmoreLucky @TheBasedTrinity @Mobrulesucks @jared_lowry_ @watchmen915 @darwintojesus Give me some credit :) I didn't pull that stat out of nowhere - https://t.co/rYJ3QvecbY
@bertvancleynen1 @natakapesa @joe_insanity @GigaBasedDad Its not a tactic, but a known constraint of protein structures. Here's the paper detailing such. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF But the same math's apply. The flagellar motor and exactly zero proteins with the most similar organelle, the T3SS. Of the 40 unique proteins, several are
@MurderSwan @Pardon_Me_Again @deadtosin610 It is hard and I've been honest and direct with you, maybe harshly, but though love is necessary sometimes. Check out this paper on probabilities of protein formation. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF it's essential for understanding what it takes just for basic components. Also,
@ZaBong69 @AaronHeikkila @WorldAltMedia Ask and you shall receive. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@LarsTheBadMan @AiG Probability. Anything with odds greater than 1 in 10^50 is realistically zero. Do you want links to all the papers that have the odds greater for the origin of life? Here’s one for the odds of just 1 functional enzyme to be produced by random chance. https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP https://t.co/LFotVQBYaF
@JoshuaG19367959 @darwintojesus Here's one such calculation. There are many, many, many more factors of equal or greater improbability. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@Hypertrough @darwintojesus Nope, here's a peer reviewed study that uses known factors for protein formation. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd Happy to discuss the particulars.
@JonHammond1701 @darwintojesus Or this https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd
@godrottdot1 @DoorStop0 @michaer27 @AiG Maybe actually respond to what I said and cited. You completely missed it. Here, I’ll make it easy for you. Chance for a FUNCTIONAL PROTEIN of average length to originate by chance is 1 in 10^77. https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP
@godrottdot1 @michaer27 @AiG How many do you want? How about a couple to start. Mathematically impossible for 1 average sized functional protein to evolve randomly. Must have been produced by an Intelligent Agent. https://t.co/RyIoGacU8s https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP https://t.co/5pgtL3vuSs
@DNevans2013 @AiG Mathematical impossibility is one obvious proof. 1 chance in 10^77 is mathematically impossible for just one average functional protein to arise by chance. https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP https://t.co/gDuXspuMHj
@Ausbloke93 @leroyb756 Here's one. The probability of a single, small protein forming in favorable conditions is 10^-77. https://t.co/M5gL60HrKd If considering the requirement for a homochiral mix and only peptide bonds it's something like 10^258. The simplest life on earth has over 485
@GigaBasedDad The probability of a single protein sequence of 150 amino acids in length being generated randomly is on the order of 1 in 10^77. [Axe, Douglas. “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds.” Journal of Molecular Biology 341 (2004)]
@ScienceQriosity @S1mpleS1mon @parad1gmm @Wasp14b @MackyMus_24 Which has been shown to be impossible. 1 chance in 10^77 to form a small, functional protein. You are putting your faith in something that mathematically is impossible. https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP
@ScienceQriosity @S1mpleS1mon @parad1gmm @Wasp14b @MackyMus_24 Ok, here’s one example. Now it’s your turn. In probability theory, odds as low as 1 in 10^50 are considered impossible. Here’s an example of the probability of just one functional protein (150 AA’s long) being randomly produced. 1 chance in 10^77. https://t.co/rdFOVKMhXP https://t.co/tPBsLYFxAd
@alfbennymedia @NotEvolution1 Yep, it kinda is statistically impossible. Here's a study of the probability of a single, small protein forming by chance in favorable conditions. That's one protein when a smallest organism we know of has over 485 unique proteins. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF The chances is
@FriedCh41287569 @HTown_MBrown @SarahisCensored @TomPopp12 Stephen C. Meyer https://t.co/eEMXyEoRyO Michael J. Behe https://t.co/MBFnglHb8a Douglas D. Axe https://t.co/HeSU9nIYuW I could list another 20+ if you like.
@DarwinianAscent @ApoloJedi_ This is actually based on a peer reviewed study that details the actual folding of proteins, amino by amino. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF While there are proteins that have somewhat similar shape, they are also a good bit different and very complex in their own right. ==
@MilesMosley666 @D1scoJerrys @MephistoTabern1 @swede__ @Cern_lXXl @SeamusOBrien42 @zypisfy @The_Real_BiM @kali8989 @IngridIngwah @Raven4212 @Takethatjoe @downs1nthehouse @TXgalLucy @SecularSmurf @edielizzard1 @JHerbatov @AdorablePodcast @kim_because @KuriousChristos @edgy_knife @ArchLuminous @IrisB42744268 @Melanie33720945 @Bumpalump99 @DeanoMartino1 @depth_ocean_ @Wolfpak561 @Covidtalk1 @horusrage @rubblebubb15764 @MindfulDamage @CryLeftists @itisjustmebabe @Russian04239821 @pray2pesci @willsworldview @A_Damned_mk2 @_Truthster @voidalEntropy @Frustd_Atheist @BrianNazarenus @WooWooSpaceJew @Simple_Shaman @Godsspear011 @merhart2112 @DarkCowboyGod @Anticommiememes Begging the question. How do you know there is no intent? For every 1 way to fold a protein correctly (so it works) there are 10^77 ways to fold it incorrectly (where it doesn’t work). https://t.co/39PU9a4CH5
@Nemhthenga The book review article https://t.co/835JuvcrFR by David Gelernter does not cite from where he takes it, i guess because the citation to Douglas Axe's calculation is in the book. But this might be the source https://t.co/ExGJGAKmwB
@Jeemie4043 @SirSicCrusader I'm guessing you don't have the best grasp. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@SirSicCrusader Here's one. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@annex1onemli https://t.co/AcIQGq7hM2 https://t.co/uWeW1EqiSi
@shiagi @Grandpadan1776 @Ah_Science @TheScot60 @kristin60360483 @EljorisJoris @CharlesRBissell @WillChristen2 @UkraineTrollbot @MrBully67 @JasonTruth7 @CryptoSpaceCas1 Axe has used the rarity for new protein folds to develop to illustrate the impossibility of evolution. New protein folds are necessary for new body plans. https://t.co/WFhW19jlBC
@MeMaraCass @obannan @Ah_Science @ElijahSchaffer @clbolt Not only that, even proteins cannot evolve = 2004 paper https://t.co/GBRYz2x3Vf https://t.co/BpFnUnQaWt Discovery Institute article on the paper https://t.co/ppeC8Bo7vH Video on the paper https://t.co/QThPK6IjlN
@diegohaz @gerrypayne @BowTiedRanger Yes, I gave you the round, still two decimal places off. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF This is for the smallest protein we know of. This applies to any new protein folding, even our best guesses for early earth or an organism that is developeda new functionsand novel protein. .
@SteveTiger999 Why isn't this paper a paper? I know you hate the author but a paper is is nonetheless https://t.co/mUurCtax21
@aresteanu @wil_da_beast630 https://t.co/oPQfZvQDvk
@SteveTiger999 @Svedjebruket If one posits evolution true then it would be enough time. However, the time required for new protein folds to be produced by random mutations acting on natural selection is probable greater than 13B yrs. The number of combinations is astronomical. https://t.co/WFhW19jTra
@PTGuy5 @MilicajRobert @InvestGCM @Gutsick_Gibbon Also new protein folds are necessary for new body plans to form. There is not enough time in the universe for that to happen by random mutations acting on natural selection. https://t.co/WFhW19jlBC
Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds - ScienceDirect https://t.co/IJA0ouMOSL
@mcleod_jace @kjsolafide @rkdoctr @David32856757 @wendelltalks Well, there several. Here is one about the probability of protein forming. https://t.co/M5gL60GTUF
@Unapologet26919 @Stimpyz1 @newclearthought @robmcallen9565 @AtheistRepublic Seriously? The mutations are random. Did you study this. OK. You asked for it. https://t.co/WFhW19jlBC
@ceemester @sm_ar_ta_ss @ThatOddImperial @VaporPete @lukeappleton It does. Here's a summary by ChatGPT that might be easier for you to digest. The paper you're referring to, "Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds" by Douglas D. Axe, investigates a fundamental question in biochemistry and
@Call_Me_Emo1 Douglas. D. Axe “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds” doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2004.06.058. J. Mol. Biol. (2004) 341, 1295–1315.
@rfeynmansss @CristiansPV @CienciaFeVerdad @MichaelBajania El experimento investiga esto: Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds
@rfeynmansss Ignorante. Un estudio investigativo no puede partir de un prejuicio. Investiga un fenómeno concreto y recoje los resultados. Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds
@MadDogCoops @Watchmiker @Dan66683767 @CapturingChrist I would probably say that Douglas Axe’s 2004 paper in the Journal of Molecular Biology titled “Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds” is the most relevant, but that’s just an opinion.
@Atheist_1978 @0x526978 @Tokyogreen @__Helicon__ @Atheist_Dragon @mark_georgiou @jealousgod1 @JustSayingWhat1 @Schmoop0521 @robster16a @imkimaaron @Atlanticus74 @BabeTruth2 @donholtmac @pray2pesci @dougstone2019 @SDarkmore @FreethinkHeart @1stthes521 @CandySmith74 @ForTheUSA2 @TakeThatEpi @acneonmyshirt @zalphaprime @Terrenc58307664 @Catheri77148739 @the1researcher @LibertyDrunk @MysteriousWay15 @godspeedbarry @vg_yyc @StefanMolyneux @ImNotASkeleton2 @Xenophon13 @orna_verum @hauxton @westworld1974 @Cant_Read_Maps @TertiusIII @WilliamPitteng1 @Simple_Shaman @Janetb172 @PaulDubuisson @YvonneGetcarter @paulr140 @DianWChain1 @RegularAnon @TedPerkins10 @LeannEAF @Loriniowa Many math proofs have been published for peer review, dumbo. 1/4 Douglas D. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, 341:1295-1315 (2004). 2/4
(10) إحتمالية تَكُون/انطواء بروتين ليُصبح فعّال وظيفياً (بطريقة عشوائية) تحتاج فترة (عدد مرات من المحاولات) تصل الى 10 مرفوع للقوة 77 ، بمعنى، ضع رقم 1 وجنبه 77 صفراً ! المصدر Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds https://t.co/RyEfsr9mdr
@RlalbrechtTroy Douglas D. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 341:1295–1315 (2004).
@TheCrimson_Fkr @AtheisticSnail @JordivisionD @Through_Science @Lee20973133 Douglas D. Axe, “Estimating the Prevalence of Protein Sequences Adopting Functional Enzyme Folds,” Journal of Molecular Biology, Vol. 341:1295–1315 (2004).
ا
IB
S
MA
TP
S
L
WB
W
VT
K
R
?
DF
RR
K
J
SH
GL
E
PM
B
ST
V
CM
N
MM
C
JB
S
T