'cos I have this feeling that you're making this up as you go along...
It's really not that hard. Each nucleotide can be one of four bases A,T,C or G. The chance of any one being correct for the enzyme in question is therefore 1 in 4. First nucleotide correct? 1 in 4. Second nucleotide correct as well? 1 in 4
2=16. Third as well? 1 in 4
3=64. And so on, all the way up to 1 in 4
1000. The -1 represents the one chance in this enormous figure that will give you the desired enzyme. If you want
any enzyme you can divide the result by 20,000 (that's the estimated number of enzymes possible). It's still a laughingly tiny probability.
Yet another argument based on a misunderstanding of basic statistics.
The calculation is based on a number of incorrect assumptions.
The first is that mutations are independent of each other. They are not. Each mutation must produce a viable outcome. That means that any mutation, in order to survive and be selected for must either be an improvement or neutral. Unfavourable ones will be selected out. This reduces the number of possible outcomes. Once a mutation has been fixed another mutation
which may not have been possible/viable before now becmes possible. (OK it is
possible that a mildly unfavourable mutation
might survive long enough for a second one to happen).
Secondly, the calculation assumes a goal: that the particular enzyme (for example) produced is the only possible one. We know from biological observation that enzymes with greatly differing structures will perform the same function: see
cytochrome c:
Here is an example of the differences in cytochrome C between organisms; this was posted on talk.origins:
"Nearly every living thing on earth has as part of its makeup a protein called cytochrome C. This protein is made up of about 100 amino acid molecules arranged in a long chain.
In a yeast cell ony 50 of these amino acids are the same as man's.
In a kernel of wheat 43 are different.
In a silkworm's body 31 are different
In a tuna fish's body 21 are different.
In a frog's body 18 are different.
In a snake's body only 14 are different.
In a dog's only 11 are different.
And in a rhesus monkey's body only 1 amino acid out of 100 in the chain of cytochrome c is different."
Also, in many cases, you can take the enzyme from one species, imnplant it in another and have it function.
The plain fact is that
calculating evolotionary probabilities is impossible: all that those wo try to do is construct an calculation of the propability of a particular molecule exisiting as a function of the probability of assembling it from its components
in one operation and then draw an
a priori assumption that the mindumbing number conclusion that it could not happen.
This is what I call the Bridge Hand Fallacy. If you are playing bridge, the probability of getting
any hand of 12 cards is 1 in 158,753,389,900. However, the probability of getting
a hand of 12 cards is very slightly less than 1 (the game could be interrupted).
For Whigs admit no force but argument.
™ Version 4.2
(1)
