A medium protein might include about 300 amino acids. The DNA gene controlling this would have about 1,000 nucleotides in its chain. Since there are four kinds of nucleotides in a DNA chain, one consisting of 1,000 links could exist in 41,000 forms. Using a little algebra (logarithms) we can see that 4 power 1000=10 power 600. Ten multiplied by itself 600 times gives the figure 1 followed by 600 zeros! This number is completely beyond our comprehension. The number 4 power 1000 is the equivalent of 10 power 600. This means 1 followed by 600 zeros. As 1 with 12 zeros after it indicates a trillion, 600 zeros represents an inconceivable number. The impossibility of the formation of RNA and DNA by a coincidental accumulation of nucleotides is expressed by the French scientist Paul Auger in this way: We have to sharply distinguish the two stages in the chance formation of such as nucleotides by chemical events. The production of nucleotides one by one - which is possible- and the combination of these with in very special sequences. The second is absolutely impossible. For many years, Francis Crick believed in the theory of molecular evolution, but eventually even he had to admit to himself that such a complex molecule could not have emerged spontaneously by coincidence, as the result of an evolutionary process: An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that, in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a
miracle.
The Turkish evolutionist Professor Ali Demirsoy was forced to make the following confession on the issue: In fact, the probability of the formation of a protein and a nucleic acid (DNA RNA) is a probability way beyond estimating. Furthermore, the chance of the emergence of a certain protein chain is so slight as to be called astronomic. A very interesting paradox emerges at this point: While DNA can only replicate with the help of special proteins (enzymes), the synthesis of these proteins can only be realized by the information encoded in DNA. As they both depend on each other, either they have to exist at the same time for replication, or one of them has to be "created" before the other
Evolution deceit , Haroun Yehia
If you are going to say that the human cell evolved , I'd tell you that the same example is still applied on yeast cell , algae and plant cells which are still extremely complicated. So life can't start without an original creator.
In addition, many single-celled forms of life exist, but no known forms of animal life have 2, 3, 4, or 5 cells . Known forms of life with 620 cells are parasites, so they must have a complex animal as a host to provide such functions as respiration and digestion. If macroevolution happened, one should find many transitional forms of life with 220 cellsfilling the gap between one-celled and many-celled organisms.
First, abiogenesis is not evolution. But I will continue...
I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to get at with your calculation. Of course the longer a DNA sequence is, the more combinations make up that DNA sequence. For the final protein though, only a few amino acids may cause a dysfunctional change, and of which DNA has redundancy in a degenerative code (i.e. more than one codon codes for one amino acid).
Though, either way, this has no relevance to evolution, it is just a fact. And of course, biology does take this into consideration, biologists didn't just overlook it.
Now your impossibility of formation of DNA. You are thinking of this the wrong way. One day, there wasn't just a soup of molecules that randomly assembled into the exact DNA configuration of a 300 amino acid sequence.
This is what creationists think, that someone sat their and ordered all of them.
Pyrimidines and purines are natural chemicals (you don't contest that water can form naturally, so purines and pyrimidines can). So can phosphates and sugars. It is not difficult to imagine then, that small segments of DNA, a few bases long could, spontaneously assemble.
Nor is it hard to imagine, simple proteins assembling; especially when you have such a large amount of molecules, and attempts by those molecules.
From here, who knows how, life formed - abiogenesis.
You can ask me how, and i answer, i don't know. One thing i can say though, god has a 100% failure rate up to now, of being put down to anything explained by science. I.e. he doesn't cause lightning, like the greeks said, or row the sun across the sky, or produce shooting stars, and stars aren't heaven. So why would i now, just say god did it, just for, in many years time, to be proved wrong. It's more simple, we just don't know.
WHAT WE DO KNOW. is how a single cell progresses to every species alive today.
You mention the protein DNA paradox. I'm not a believer in paradoxes. something must be wrong. In my opinion, they both arose at the same time, both from a soup of probability. Remember, those billions of molecules, and trillions of attempts, aren't just on earth, but everywhere. I.e. we could be asking these questions from anywhere, probability doesn't really come into it. If it can happen, then it probably has.
You talk about the lack of 2-20 cell organisms.
This is very interesting. It's likely due to a change in conditions on earth, that make 2-20 cell organisms inefficient. They will be out competed by higher celled organisms, or by single celled ones. This was not the case on primordial earth because of different conditions, and competition.
Also, i will point out. You were once 2-20 cells, and you were living.
Single celled bacteria don't normally live on their own, but often function as a group/colony. This could be between 2-20 cells (though is usually much much more if nutrient supply is enough).
Obviously 2-20 celled organisms would not be fossilised.
