The layman who tattles about things he has no single clue or understanding of.<quoted text>Evolution of man from ape-like creatures is impossible
Also for every favourable mutation there must be at least 100 unfavourable ones. When is the last time a random spelling mistake improved the text? For an unfavourable change to die out the individual must die. Apes dont have enough babies for 100 to die for every one that lives. So the species would quickly die out.
The major flaws here are:
- you assume that ALL deleterious mutations have to be lethal. It's not.
- there are lethal deleterious mutations all the way to deleterious mutations that only cause minor problems - an individual not able to run that fast, individual with genetic disorders or problems but who live on and even get offspring etc. and everything in between.
- you don't start with "having babies" but at the moment of fertilization. Of 1000 fertilized eggs, only 500 or even less result in life birth. 70% of those miscarriages are found to be caused by genetic disorders in the foetus.
- in nature of all born offspring 40% or even more die before they reach fertile age.
- that means that, cumulated, ONLY 25-30% of all fertilized eggs reach fertile age.
- THEN you just ignore sexual selection. Genetic DNA studies in humans revealed that of all men ever lived, only 40% reproduced. In women the rate is 80%. This can be estimated by comparing differential mutation rates in mtDNA, along with x- and y-chromosomes.
- that means that roughly only 50% of all humans who ever lived, actually reproduced.
- cumulated: only 12.5-15% of all fertilized eggs lead to reproducing individuals.
Yet they WILL die out: 85-87.5% of all fertilized eggs do not result in reproducing individuals.<quoted text>
If the unfavourable mutations dont die out then the genome will slowly deteriorate not evolve. That is we would get devolution.
Just ONE base-pair (in a billion) can produce:<quoted text>
Also a single small change in the genome - one base pair in a billion would be such a small change that it would be unlikely to be the reason an individual lived rather than died. Random chance would be a much bigger factor affecting whether they ran into a predator.
- lethal genetic diseases. Sickle-cell anaemia is caused by just one point-mutation. ONE letter, out of 3.1 billion!
- or, for that matter, also considerable advantage.
Although the size of the mutation matters of course (the bigger the size, the larger the genetic effect to be expected), the EFFECT of a mutation is also very strongly dependant on the PARTICULAR SPOT on he genome hit.
HENCE evolution of man from ape like creatures will have enough time, enough progeny, enough of a driving force and if it did would actually happens.
Two further things:
- in dog breeding we can see HOW FAST evolution can go and HOW LITTLE progeny it takes. In dog breeding human breeder do the selection but the only thing the breeder does is taking advantage of the mechanisms nature provides. All dog breeds, from chihuahua to Danish dogs, descend from the grey wolf. Most dog breeds are from the last millennium (only a few date back earlier) and even form the last few centuries.
- as we examine the geological record, we observe rock layers. The deeper, the older the layer - by very logic. If we start to dig, in some top layers we find remains of humans. When we dig deeper, those disappear. We see fossils of homo erectus, australopithecus and other hominids. But NO humans. Even deeper these disappear also and we ar eleft with fossils of pithecia ("apes"). You may draw your conclusions.
I strongly advice you NOT to tattle about things BEFORE you have some MINIMUM understanding and clue about it.