>>6725437Here, dumbass.
Personally, I don't believe in evolution. 1. Give me the beneficial mutation rates of any organism of your choosing 2. How many mutations does it take to go from point A to point B from any trait of your choosing (i.e. heart)?
Abiogenesis is ridiculous too. So the universe is so big that there are a few earths, and among those, there are cells that magically form, and among those, there are cells that can self-replicate, and among those, there are cells that self-replicate imperfectly (since they actually can't self-replicate perfectly because if they did, evolution wouldn't be able to occur). It's all a series of "what ifs". Stretching probability farther than reasonable. Just because something is possible doesn't make it probable (i.e. I won't win the lottery 100 million times in a row. Is it possible? Yes. Is it probable? Of course not). Just because something CAN happen doesn't mean it WILL.
Not enough trial and error chances for evolution to occur
Source: (update later)
The evolution of molecular machines makes no sense either. Say the ATP synthase motor. It provides the energy currency of the cell. No ATP = cell won't function. Anyways, say you were at the beginning. You get a rotor and a stator from some supposed "beneficial mutation(s)"... so.. then what? Here's where evolution fails. There are points in the creation of traits where there would be no function. No function = natural selection won't take place. No natural selection = no evolution because natural selection is the main mechanism TO evolution (i.e. evolution is not random because natural selection is what makes it not random in the first place). No natural selection = dead end and a molecular machine with just a stator and rotor won't have a function. Period.
