As another example of mutations, a random mutation, such as a deleted
nucleotide, must first pick a random location on the DNA (e.g. nucleotide
#1,633,099,415), then the mutation must delete that nucleotide (the nucleotide
that was deleted might have been an A, C, G, or T).

Note that there is a one in 2 billion chance that the correct nucleotide will be
deleted because every nucleotide has the same probability of being chosen for
deletion!

This is an example of the "location" issue combined with deleting a
nucleotide.
It turns out that the "location" issue is far more important than the reader might
think.

Examples below will demonstrate the importance of the "location" issue.
Remember, the three key variables in a mutation are "location of the mutation,"
"type of mutation," and "resulting nucleotide," meaning which nucleotide will end
up at that location (i.e. or lack thereof in the case of a deletion).

Every random mutation..has a one in 2 billion chance of choosing the correct
location (1 in 2 billion) for the mutation, a one in three chance of picking the
correct type of mutation (1 in 3) and a one in four chance in ending up with the
correct nucleotide (1 in 4).

2 billion times 3 times 4 equals 24,000,000,000.
That means every mutation has a probability of one in 24,000,000,000 of
being what evolution wanted (i.e. one in: 2 billion times 3 times 4), if the parent
species had DNA of 2 billion nucleotides!

And if you make 1,000 mutations, every one of these mutations has a one in
24,000,000,000 chance of being the correct mutation (i.e. in the correct location,
the correct type of mutation and the correct nucleotide ending up in that location,
if any)!

These three variables totally annihilate the theory of evolution from a statistical
standpoint!

No statistician on earth would support the theory of evolution if they
understood the issues and kept an open mind. Unfortunately, there are very few,
and probably zero, open minds in the field of evolutionary biology.

Before going on,..let us again state the "Prime Directive" of the theory of evolution..because it is so very important:

If evolution were true,
scientists should be able to look at two animals
(which have a parent-child relationship..on the phylogenetic tree)

(*and..easily demonstrate how the DNA of the parent species could
randomly mutate..into the DNA of the child species.

We must never lose track of this key directive of evolution!

And we must never
lose track.,.of the claim that all child species are improvements over the parent
species.

Evolutionists must prove this is possible by: first, randomly picking the "location"
of each mutation, second, randomly picking the "type" of mutation (i.e. addition,
change or deletion) at that location and third, randomly picking the "new"
nucleotide (if any) at that location.

It is time for some training tests.
Break out a pen and some paper and let's see
how you do.

Gulp, now that we know the basics, let the mathematics begin!

Note: the reader might be thinking that "evolution has no direction."
This, and other issues, will be discussed in a future chapter.

Your First Test Question
Suppose a "parent species" has DNA with 2 billion nucleotides (we only count
the nucleotides on one side of the DNA strand).

Suppose the "child species" will
also have 2 billion nucleotides,..but 10,000 of the nucleotides will be different than
on the "parent species" or "old species."

In other words, we will take..an existing DNA strand (of the "parent species")..and
randomly change 10,000 of the nucleotides..to create a new species (the "child
species").lol

To keep things simple, we will assume..
no nucleotides will be added and none will
be deleted.

We will only deal with changed nucleotides in this example.
Note: Technically this will not create a new species because, by my
own definition, a new species must have at least one "new" gene.

But
hang in there, this is a training exercise.
Later we will deal with the
"new" gene issue.

We will assume we know**..lol
..*which 10,000 nucleotides need to be changed..lol
..unlike how science claims..lol..by chance*

assume
..lol..[cause thats THE THEORY*..the best science can offer]

assume*..we know which 10,000 nucleotides...*need to be changed and we
will call them the "target nucleotides" because these are the only nucleotides we NEED*.. to change!

We will also call them the.."bad nucleotides" because we want
to change them..to create a new species.

We could list the nucleotide # of each
of the 10,000 nucleotides we want to change, but we won't.

In other words, on the "parent species" these 10,000 specific nucleotides are
"good nucleotides" because they are the correct nucleotides for the "parent
species."

But on the "child species" these same 10,000 nucleotides need to be changed so
we will call them "bad nucleotides" or "target nucleotides."

They are at very
precise locations on the DNA and we know where these locations are!

However, evolution is..;..blind dumb and evolution does not know where these locations are or what is supposed to be there or not be there!

Remember*..every nucleotide on the child DNA (which is a copy of the parent DNA and will then be mutated) is either a "target nucleotide"..that evolved a NEW/IMPROVED..(i.e. a "bad nucleotide" that we want to change) or a "good nucleotide" (that we don't want to
change), relative to the new "child species."

On the DNA of the "child species," there are 10,000 "target nucleotides" or "bad
nucleotides" and there are 1,999,990,000 "good nucleotides" that we don't want
to change.

In an attempt to create this new "child species," suppose there are 200,000
random mutations (all of them are "changes" of a nucleotide) at random locations
on the DNA strand of the "child species."

When making these 200,000 random mutations, remember that the "location" of
each mutation on the DNA strand..[crossover strand]..must be totally random and the new nucleotide
at that location must also be totally random.

RECALL THIS IS THE BEST THEORY SCIENCE HAS

,..if we numbered..the nucleotides..on the on the DNA
from..#1/#2/#3/#4etc..to the end of the DNA at #2,000,000,000,..

*the "location" issue means...evolution..*doesn't know which nucleotides..should be changed because evolution..by its own laws..is clueless and stupid because, by definition,..mutations are totally by fluke/chance..ie random,..both in terms of location,.,.type of mutation and resulting nucleotide.,.(if any).

If "evolution" knew..which nucleotides needed to be change
then we would be dealing with intelligence, meaning "God," which is a forbidden word for evolutionists to utter or think about.

For example,..when by chance..picking a location..for a mutation, we essentially pick a random number from #1 to #2,000,000,000.

An example would be: nucleotide
#1,397,943,567.

The nucleotide at this location..*might be a "bad nucleotide" or a "good nucleotide,.. randomness or evolution doesn't have a clue and doesn't care.!

Every nucleotide..has an equal chance
of being chosen every time there is a mutation.

In fact,..a single nucleotide..*could be changed two or three times, but we will ignore this..very real possibility.

...And the new nucleotide..put ONLY..at each of those locations (considering only "changes")..is also totally randomly chosen.

That is the only way..that evolution
can be...said tp work,..otherwise we are dealing with intelligence.!

With this background,..let us talk about the 200,000 random mutations which will attempt to convert..this "parent species" into a..NEW*.."child species."

As mentioned,..to make things simple
we will not consider..deleting or adding any
nucleotides..*to the DNA of the new species.

First Test Question:

Statistically speaking,..if we randomly choose 200,000 nucleotides
from the DNA,..at random locations,..*and then mutated each nucleotide
into a randomly chosen nucleotide;..*how many of these 200,000
mutations w..ll affect one of the 10,000 "target nucleotides" or "bad
nucleotides"{that we want..NEED* to change]..and how many will affect "good nucleotides"..*that we don't want to change?

Try to calculate the number,
or take a wild guess,..before reading any further.

Write down your answer
on a piece of paper before reading on.

First Answer:
The number of "target nucleotides"..that will be affected..is one.

That's right: 1 out..of the 200,000 mutations*will affect a "target nucleotide"!

the other 199,999/mutations ..ill affect "good nucleotides" that we do not want to change!

The other 199,999...bad nucleotides....*Will affect..the "good nucleotides"..that we do not want to change!

that thus..usually end up..*aborted..
or die..or are sickly

anyhow

Here's..how to calculate
the 1.."target nucleotide"..that is changed:..gradually..lol

Step 1:..Take 200,000 mutations
and divide it by 2,000,000,000..total nucleotides

and you get 0.0001.

This is the ratio..of all nucleotides
that will/could be affected by the..200,000 mutations.

Step 2:..Multiply 10,000..(the number of "target nucleotides") times 0.0001 (the ratio or probability of a mutation..affecting a random group of nucleotides;..this will tell us how many nucleotides...in this group will be mutated)

and you get..*one.

One..is the number of "target nucleotides"
that will be affected by the 200,000 ERRORS/mutations!

If you did computer simulations..for this exercise 350 times,
on average only '1' of..the "target nucleotides" would be changed..per simulation.

The Most Damaging Question

The fact..that only one "target nucleotide" is changed
is not even remotely..the biggest problem for evolution.

For those who are bold enough,..here is an even bigger question:

How much damage to the DNA..of the new "child species" will be done
by the 199,999 mutations which affected "good nucleotides?

Hint:
these mutations could potentially damage many,..many of these critical
"good nucleotides?"

Try to calculate that number
..before reading on.

Evolution would have to take into account..both the one mutation that affected a.."target nucleotide..*plus the far more important 199,999 mutations.../that affected "good nucleotides"..*each of which could potentially replace a "good nucleotide"..with a "bad nucleotide!"

In other words,..how many of these 199,999 "good nucleotides"
will be converted..into "bad nucleotides" by these 200,000 crossover random mutations?

The answer to this question..will require a lot of explanation.

yet note the silence of science..

Let us start by talking about the third key issue,
what "type of nucleotide" ends up..at each location, an A, C, G or T?

Remember: the "location of the mutation" on
the DNA..is the first key issue..

and the "type of mutation"..is the second key issue.

The third key issue is.."what type of nucleotide..*ends up at what location."

Let us..analyze the third key issue..in detail.

Which Nucleotide..Will Result..From Each Mutation?

Suppose,..for a specific "target nucleotide" you want a mutation to change a 'C' (a
"target nucleotide") into a 'G' (the new "good nucleotide" for the new "child
species"); as part of creating this new "child species."

However, mutations create random nucleotides; meaning randomness (i.e.
evolution) could not care less what you want!! To convert a nucleotide into what
you want would be using intelligence, and God is not allowed.

Note: The reader may have noted in the above histogram of real
human DNA, that every permutation of four nucleotides was
represented in the chart.

This indicates that any permutation of four
nucleotides can be found on human DNA.

Remember also that 97%..of human DNA is not understood by scientists and its function is unknown.

A random "change mutation" can change a 'C' into an 'A' or into a 'C' (yes, as
noted above a mutation can change an "old C" nucleotide into a "new C"
nucleotide, but it ends up being a 'C' nonetheless) or into a 'G' or into a 'T'.
Of these four options,

*only one of them is correct, the 'G' in this case.
This means 25% (1 of 4) of all possible mutations are correct (the 'G')

and 75% (3 of 4) of..all possible mutations are incorrect (an 'A', a "new C," which is nothing but a 'C',and a 'T')!!

Thus, when there is a change mutation there is only a 25% chance the mutation will leave a correct nucleotide at the location.

Note: As a side note it should also be observed that any nucleotide can be..changed more than once. For example, suppose a 'C' "target nucleotide"
was changed into a 'G' by the 3,391st mutation, which is what you wanted.

However, there is nothing to "protect" this nucleotide from later being
changed into an 'A', which you don't want!! For example, in the 159,102nd
mutation the 'G' might be changed into an 'A', which you don't want.

The reason I mention this issue..is because some evolutionists have
claimed that if a nucleotide is changed into a good nucleotide,..that it is somehow "protected".

continues