Evolutionism is a faith that every system in this world has been formed naturally. But there is no proof of that. The proofs that evolutionists present are just "interpretations". They cannot explain how the system of photosynthesis was formed. Until the completion, the individuals with the uncompleted organ of photosynthesis had no advantages for their survival over those without, because half-completed systems could not create organic substances.

Evolutionists noticed the fact, i.e., they know that there are a lot of systems in this world that would be meaningless if they had not instantly been formed to function completely. Photosynthesis, system of blood coagulation, etc. It is impossible to explain evolution of these systems just by the principle of survival of the fittest. How could a series of uncountable number of chemical reactions composing the PS evolve without the assistance of driving force of competition for survival?

Evolutionism is bogus. As you know from your experiences, failures create just chaos. A drama might be more interesting by some failures but not many. Evolutionism is based on the belief: "accumulation of genetical failures created more meaningful traits". To explain this belief, evolutionists uses the principle of survival of the fittest: Fitter individuals survive, so the genetical traits also survive. Gradually more meaningful traits are formed. But what if this principle cannot be applied?

During the billion year period of formation of photosynthesis, the organ with PS had no function meaningful for survival. The principle should be applied: "Meaningless organs degenerate". So evolutionists should believe that photosynthetic systems degenerated during the evolutional process. There is a grim reality : Evolutionism will kill evolutionism.

Mutations happening during the process of evolution are overwhelmingly "failures" from the point of view of usefulness. Experiments show that the mutated genes create overwhelmingly "inferior traits" for survival because chance creates chaos. For example, if you repeatedly change digital data of a computer image of a mountain using a randomly modifying program code, you will mess up the image, not add beautiful clouds or trees, etc. to that. Chance makes chaos out of order.

But evolutionist says, "Chance has been creating order from chaos. Mutation has been happening to create superior genes for survival." It's wrong. Even if it is driven by the force of natural selection, randomness is just randomness. No matter how many random things may happen, chaos remains unchanged. And regarding photosynthetic system, the organ with that system had not been environmentally superior to other individuals without it until the system was completed and began to be useful for the owner.

I ask evolutionists, "What made the system complete enough to provide the owner with useful materials? What formed the complete chain of reactions, which make light and CO2 into organic matters despite the fact that the owner had not gained any superiority from that system while it was imperfect?" Or do evolutionists want to say, "Purely contingent mutations of genes instantly completed the sequence of neucleotides that can form the trait of PS"? Can you believe that? Pure chance created PS?

Then a problem of probability comes to the fore. The probability to get by chance a single protein constituting an enzyme to catalyze a chemical reaction included in PS system is overwhelmingly small. One protein is composed of at least 100 amino acids. There are 20 kinds of amino acid in the world. So, the probability of a smallest protein being formed by chance is 1/20 to the 100th power, which is about 1/10 to the 130th. It is obvious that photosynthetic system cannot be created by chance.

2009年6月20日