Page 767 - Atlas of Creation Volume 4

Harun Yahya

The infinite amount of time needed for hypothetical beneficial mutations
The infinite amount of time needed for hypothetical beneficial mutations
Even if we hypothesize that beneficial mutations could take place, the idea of mutation is still in-
compatible with the theory of evolution. In a paper titled “The Inadequacy of Neo-Darwinian Evolution
As a Scientific Theory,” Professor Murray Eden from the MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology)

Faculty of Electrical Engineering showed that if it required a mere six mutations to bring about an adap-
tive change, this would occur by chance only once in a billion years - while, if two dozen genes were in-
volved, it would require 10,000,000,000 years, which is much longer than the age of the Earth. 15 Even if
we assume that mutations were effective and beneficial in complex organs, and structures requiring

more than one mutation to occur at the same time, mathematicians still say the problem of time is an acute
dilemma for Darwinists. Even Professor of Paleontology George G. Simpson, one of the most unrepentant
Darwinists, clearly states that it would take an infinite length of time for five mutations to happen at the same
time. 16 An infinite amount of time means zero probability. And that is a probability which applies to all the

structures and organs possessed by living things. Thus, there is no possibility of the glorious variety of life we
see in our daily lives coming about through mutations.
The evolutionist George G. Simpson has performed another calculation regarding the mutation claim in
question. He admitted that in a community of 100 million individuals, which could hypothetically produce a

new generation every day, a positive outcome from mutations would only take place once every 274 billion
years. That number is many times greater than the age of the Earth, estimated to be at 4.5 billion years old. 17
These, of course, are all calculations assuming that mutations have a positive effect on the generations which
gave rise to them, and on subsequent generations; but no such assumption applies in the real world.

Mutation
Living DNA is a highly complex structure. Any
random intervention can only harm that struc-
ture. And that gives rise to sickly, crippled and
dead organisms.

DNA helix

Why is the body that is supposedly evolving protected against mutations?
Why is the body that is supposedly evolving protected against mutations?
All evolutionist scientists know that the probability of a replication error occurring in a living or-
ganism’s DNA for no reason is very low. Research has revealed that there are protective elements in the

cell that prevent genetic errors from arising. The information in DNA cannot be copied in the absence
of particular enzymes that control one another against errors. These include double-filter enzymes for
ensuring that the right amino acid binds to the right tRNA. One filter rejects amino acids that are too
large, and the other those that are too small. This is a very sensitive and rational system. There are also

enzymes that do final checks against the possibility of any error arising in this intelligent system.
Scientists have concluded that they could not imagine a better cellular control and protection system
aimed at maintaining the integrity of DNA. 18
Pierre Paul Grassé, who spent 30 years as professor of evolution at the Sorbonne, wrote this on the

subject:

The probability of dust carried by the wind reproducing Dürer’s “Melancholia” is less infinitesimal than the
probability of copy errors in the DNA molecules leading to the formation of the eye. 19

Adnan Oktar 765