Reading Guide 2: What evidence do we have to overthrow the theory of Evolution?
Objectively speaking, over one hundred years since its birth, the Theory of Evolution has experienced numerous debates and succeeded every time in beating its challengers. Therefore, the Theory of Evolution is considered as irrefutable truth in biological science circles.
People can’t help asking this question: what evidence do you have to overthrow the Theory of Evolution?
Our answer is that our evidence is based on just two simple weapons, i.e. DNA codes and secondary school mathematics. DNA codes come from GenBank (NBIC GenBank, the U.S.); mathematics provides Exponential operation, logarithm operation and Dice Theory.
For human beings, the DNA codes carry all genetic information of human beings. It is the physical genetic information carried by these DNA codes that determine the human body and the physiological features; whereas the non-physical genetic information manifests mankind’s intelligence and other related features. The facts revealed by the DNA codes are diametrically opposite to the Theory of Evolution. Meanwhile, mathematics is a powerful weapon of DNA decoding because mathematics can most profoundly show which one is the improbable hypothesis and which one is the inevitable fact.
“Neither is it the framer of theories, for it is not hypothesis; but it is the judge over both, and it is the arbiter to which each must refer its claims; and neither law can rule nor theory explain without the sanction of mathematics.” (Benjamin Peirce, 1809 – 1880, the U.S. mathematician and astronomer)
Therefore, “Mathematics is the Queen of the Sciences”. (Carl Friedrich Gauss, 1777-1855, the German physicist and astronomer).
The scope of mathematics we adopt covers:
1. Indexes：(a٠b)n=an ٠bn ; am٠an=am+n
2. The Probability of Dice Theory: For coins (two surface) P=1/2n ; for DNA 4 codes(a four sided dice ─A, T, C, G）P=1/4n
I: DNA Coding Sequence Demolished the Theory of Evolution
1. By the DNA codes, mathematic helped us to work out “Y-chromosome Adam”
If I intentionally arrange 729 coins into a sequence, e.g. the first 3 with the front facing up, the next 3 with the back facing up, and so on. With your eyes closed, please line up these 729 coins randomly into one line. How many times could you achieve the same exact sequence I arranged?
The answer is simple, i.e. 2729. It means that such a sequence is possible only by tossing for so many times on average.
Who can tell me how huge is the number, 2729? It is a large number far beyond your imagination.
Only by random arrangement with a number equal to 28 followed by 218 zeros, you can get one chance to achieve my preset sequence.
Then, the probability of one chance is 1/(28 × 10218). Do you think you could manage to achieve this preset sequence with only just one chance?
You may ask what relationship does this it has with “Adam”?
Within the Y-chromosome of the human gene ZFY, there exists a sequence of 729 DNA coding. Every male in the world has completely the same sequence, known as “Adam’s Marker”.(See the part 2 of this website)
DNA is a sequence composed of 4 nucleotides “A, T, C and G”, and 729 DNA coding sequences can form 4729=1×10439 combinations.
The above combinations are far greater than the arrangement of the coins, it is 1 followed by 439 zeros.
If you are given just one chance to arrange the 4 DNA nucleotides at random to create “Adam’s Marker” sequences, the probability is: P=1/(1×10439）=1×10˗439=0.000000……(total 438 zeros)0001.
Therefore, we can say with assurance that the “Adam’s Marker” sequence of all males in the world could only be replicated from one and the same sequence without the possibility of forming another such sequence.
Therefore, the Theory of Adam finds a mathematical explanation: it refutes the possibility of creating another man with a sequence of exactly 729 letters through evolution at random, and proves that everyone in the world shares the earliest and grand, grand… father, i.e. Y-chromosome Adam. The Adam’s Marker on the Y-chromosomes of all men in the world is replicated only from his chromosomes.
The methodology to demonstrate for the Theory of Adam using DNA coding markers and mathematics was first presented by us. To refute this conclusion, one must disprove the 729 DNA coding sequence and the basic mathematic theories. Who can refute these two basic points?
Has the conclusion based on the DNA codes and mathematics been verified? The answer is definitively positive: Not only has it been verified, this was confirmed with the DNA samples of over 1 million people.
The most important verification is this: the Y-chromosome DNA samples of 12,127 men have proven that all modern East Asian peoples are “offspring of Y-chromosome Adam from Africa”, and no Chinese people are descendants of the Peking Man (See the part 2 of this website). Since the establishment of the Theory of Adam in 1995, the marker test of all Y-chromosome samples has proven the accuracy of this conclusion. In Part 2, Figure 2-6 (The Paternal genealogical tree) is based on the Theory of Adam and has been proven correct with the analyses of nearly one million DNA samples.
How embarrassing it is to reach the erroneous conclusion, based on the Theory of Evolution, that Peking Man is the ancestor of Chinese people?
2. With evidence based on DNA codes, we have mathematically worked out the “Mitochondrial Eve”
In 1981, a group of medical experts from the University of Cambridge chose a mitochondrial DNA sample from an ordinary European for testing and showed that mitochondrial DNA has a ring-shaped sequence composed of 16,569 DNA codes. For over 40 years, all medical experts in the world adopted it as the gold standard for comparison. It has been proven time and time again that the mitochondrial DNA from whatever race or individual tested is based on the sequence in that original sample.
In addition, the mitochondrial DNA of all people in the world have similar codes at over 99% of positions. At less than 1% of those positions, the difference is caused by mutation. In 1987, based on consistency of mitochondrial DNAs of all peoples in the world, the Mitochondrial Eve theory was announced – concluding that all people are offspring of the same woman 200,000 years ago!
The theory has also been proven correct by testing the mitochondrial DNA samples of nearly one million people.
Here, we can also mathematically work out the “Mitochondrial Eve” by DNA codes. On at least 16,400 positions, the same mitochondrial DNA codes are shared by all people in the world. Therefore, by using the same methodology as before, it can be mathematically proven that it is impossible to produce such DNA sequences at random.
Like a game of craps, if one throws 16,400 dice 10,000 times, you have very little chance of getting the result of a pre-set arrangement. However every time you toss the dice, it will leave a different set of arrangements.
Since there is not a people group with a different type of DNA code sequence arrangement, we only have one chance to toss the dice. And it is absolutely impossible to generate the same DNA sequence as Mitochondrial Eve with just one random toss of the dice. Therefore, the mitochondrial DNA sequences of all peoples can only be copied from the DNA sequences of the original Mitochondrial Eve.
Calculation of random probability (P):
P=1/416400=1/109874=0.000………(total 9873 zeros)001
(See the Reference for calculation method)
The nearly zero probability shows that such a case is impossible. Therefore, the mitochondrial DNAs of all the peoples in the world have come from the same “copy”.
3. By DNA coding, we have mathematically worked out “Origins” of human beings ("The Sole Adam theory")
It shows that Y-chromosome and mitochondrial DNA prove that all human beings come from one shared grand, grand… father and a shared grand, grand… mother. This verdict is given by mathematics, the “Scientific Queen”.
Then, are there such sequences on the 22 human autosomes? Yes, there are many. In the Appendix , we provided marker sequences of 8 autosomes, which were all obtained from the GenBank. First of all, let us examine the DNA coding sequence at Thrombomodulin Gene of No. 20 chromosome (See the Appendix: DNA Code Material of GenBank: “2494 codes of human No. 20 Chromosome Marker”). From the perspective of Molecular Anthropology, this is a DNA code marker.
The DNA sequences of the 7 persons we listed are DNA coding provided by different researchers at different times to the GenBank. It shows that 2494 DNA codes are precisely consistent at the respective genetic coding sequences of the 7 persons. If this is the result generated at random, we can mathematically work out the probability of such occurrence:
Since P=1/4n=1/42494, the probability is near 0.
Not to mention the codes of 3 billion in autosomes.
We can arrive at this conclusion: the autosome DNA coding sequences of all people can only come from “one original individual” and his “original DNA coding sequences” of all autosomes without any other possibility. The DNA coding sequences of everyone else are nothing but the copies of the original DNA coding sequences.
Coding sequences of the 8 human autosomes listed in the Appendix are directly from the GenBank of National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). We have compared codes of every sequence one by one. What is more, such sequences are only a tiny part of the identical sequences of the human autosomes in the world. This conclusion finds strong support from the consistency of thousands of gene DNA codes.
All in all, all the human autosomes come from the same source. It is the verdict by which you, the “Mathematic Judge”, have to accept!
Meanwhile, comparing chromosome samples from different individuals show that the consistency of some “DNA marker” sequences has not been destroyed by the two elements, i.e. mutation and Synapsis of Meiosis, during breeding of human beings. Though the DNA codes are constantly exchanged between parents during Synapsis, the scope of the differences between DNA coding sequences remains small.
What further conclusion can we reach then?
The conclusion is this: the human autosomes come entirely from the earliest “Original Individual”. All people in the world are his direct offspring. The autosomes of all people in the world have been replicated from him.
Was the earliest person a man or a woman? Since only a man has a full set of chromosomes (including No. 1-22 autosomes as well as X/Y-chromosome), the person must be a man.
Since the autosomes of both men and women are the same, women have come from man. We can give this conclusion a name by borrowing from the “Theory of Adam” and “Theory of Eve”. We call it “scientific Adam” and also call it “The Sole Adam”.
" The Sole Adam" is the Y-chromosome Adam and Mitochondrial Eve’s ancestors (see Figure 2-16). Since ancient times, a man or woman’s DNA coding sequences can only be a replication of his DNA coding sequences. This conclusion comes from DNA coding and mathematics - an irrefutable scientific fact.
It is indeed very stunning. However, this conclusion is drawn from the DNA coding of human beings and the “verdict” of mathematics. These conclusions from DNA coding and mathematics are irrefutable.
This conclusion is drawn neither from religion nor science fiction, but is based on pure science. Without unfathomable theories, it exists nowhere but in our body’s own DNA codes and high school mathematics. Can the Theory of Evolution deny this conclusion? It is the DNA codes to sound the death knell of the Theory of Evolution.
II: The Shared Ancestor between Human Beings and Chimpanzees is a False Hypothesis
It is said that human beings and chimpanzees share the same ancestor since 98% of their genes are the same and the No. 2 human chromosome is from the fusion of two chromosomes from the chimpanzees, etc. With serious scrutiny and analysis, you will find that this hypothesis is built on faulty thinking or misunderstanding.
1. Every chromosome is a DNA coding sequence.
As early as the end of 19th century, it was known that chromosomes exist in cells. However, it was not until the 1950s that scientists confirmed by high-power microscope 23 pairs (or 46) of chromosomes exist in the nucleus of a human cell. Meanwhile, James Watson, U.S. biologist, and Francis Crick, British biologist, identified the double helix structure of DNA in chromosomes, thereby solving the “myth of life.” Their work of researching DNA in every human cell allowed us to search for the true nature of the genetic information as well as its hereditary secret.
All the marker sequences mentioned above are contained in the DNA bar codes of chromosomes. There are so many codes arranged on a chromosome about centimeters long, which is then coiled into a few microns. The 46 Chromosomes, all hidden in a tiny cell nucleus, contain the majority of genetic information (together with a small part of genetic information in the mitochondrial DNA codes). This coded secret expressed by science is really amazing.
The DNA coding sequence is very strictly regulated. At some very important positions, an error of one DNA code may lead to a serious disease. Fortunately, accurate replication mechanism exists in cell division, which ensures largely the generation of similar DNA sequences during subsequent generations of offspring.
It is because all peoples in the world come from the same initial man that the chromosome sequences of all men and women in the world have only about one thousandth of difference through thousands of generations of breeding. In the human chromosomes, some DNA sequence segments are very identical among all peoples in the world, so we call them “inherent markers” (see the Appendix). Since these “inherent markers” cannot be generated at random, they must come from DNA sequences of the first man. These conclusions from DNA coding sequences are diametrically opposed to the Theory of Evolution.
2. The difference in chromosome number is an unbridgeable gulf for apes to evolve into human beings.
The Theory of Evolution asserts that human beings and chimpanzees share the same ancestor. The two separated from each other over 6 million years ago – while human beings evolved, chimpanzees did not do so. According to the above hypothesis, the shared ancestor (ancient man apes) should have had 24 chromosomes just like the chimpanzees (including orangutans, gorillas and orangutans).
Evolutionists must accept the fact that an insurmountable gulf exists between the ancient man apes with 24 pairs of chromosomes and the modern men with 23 pairs of chromosomes. The difference in the number of chromosome pairs has made it impossible for the ancient man apes to evolve into human beings. Charles Darwin believed that evolution is achieved “by numerous, successive, and slight modifications”. However, the difference in number of chromosomes becomes an insurmountable gulf for evolution by gradual modifications. As you cannot buy 47.99 eggs from the grocery, chromosomes cannot exist by non-integers. Therefore, the number of chromosomes cannot change gradually. For example, there cannot exist ape men with 47.99, 47.98, 47.97…chromosomes between 48 (or 24 pairs of) chromosomes and 46 (or 23 pairs of) chromosomes.
Charles Darwin said in the “Origin of Species”, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case. ”
A human cell nucleus with a set of 23 pairs of chromosome could be considered as a fundamental and tiny “complex organ” and the core composed of all cells. It is not possible unlikely that the cell of ape man with 24 pairs chromosomes were evolved into the cell of human with 23 pairs chromosomes by “formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications”. Similarly, it is impossible for all the organs with 24 pairs of chromosomes to simply evolve into those with 23 pairs of chromosomes.
In the absence of a high-power microscope, it was reasonable to understand that Darwin did not find the difference in chromosome number between man and ape. However, the words of Darwin very objectively leave some leeway in his theory. Today, the leeway he left has been proven, in that his “theory would absolutely break down.”