A Calculation of the Probability of Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory- Hubert Yockey


Hubert Yockey's 1977 paper, "A Calculation of the Probability of Spontaneous Biogenesis by Information Theory," is a thought-provoking exploration into the likelihood of life arising from non-living matter purely through random chance. Yockey leverages information theory to quantify the improbable nature of spontaneous assembly of even a basic biological entity, such as an enzyme.

Central to Yockey's argument is the information content inherent in biomolecules, particularly proteins. Proteins are intricate chains of amino acids responsible for various cellular functions. The specific sequence of amino acids dictates a protein's form and function, analogous to a long string of letters conveying a specific message.

Yockey applies information theory, which measures information as the number of possibilities or choices, to estimate the odds of a functional protein arising by chance. He calculates the astronomical improbability of randomly assembling a protein with the necessary sequence to perform a biological task.

The paper's significance lies in its challenge to the prevalent idea of spontaneous biogenesis. However, Yockey's arguments have been met with counterpoints. 

Moreover, recent discoveries in prebiotic chemistry suggest that the early Earth's environment might have been more conducive to the formation of complex molecules than previously thought.

Despite these ongoing debates, Yockey's paper holds a significant place in the scientific quest to understand the origin of life. It underscores the importance of information theory in contemplating the intricate nature of biological systems. Additionally, Yockey's work has spurred further research into the plausibility of alternative pathways for abiogenesis, the formation of life from non-living matter.

Snippets:

The Darwin-Oparin-Haldane “warm little pond” scenario for biogenesis is examined by using information theory to calculate the probability that an informational biomolecule of reasonable biochemical specificity, long enough to provide a genome for the “protobiont”, could have appeared in 10^9 years in the primitive soup.

Certain old untenable ideas have served only to confuse the solution of the problem.

The number of cytochrome c sequences is about 3·8 × 1061. The probability of selecting one such sequence at random is about 2·1 ×10^65.

The primitive milieu will contain a racemic mixture of the biological amino acids and also many analogues and non-biological amino acids.

Geological evidence for the “warm little pond” is missing

Taking into account only the effect of the racemic mixture the longest genome which could be expected with 95 % confidence in 10^9 years corresponds to only 49 amino acid residues.

It is concluded that belief in currently accepted scenarios of spontaneous biogenesis is based on faith, contrary to conventional wisdom.



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Epigenetics explains Neanderthal and Human differences better than Neo-Darwinism

Image
Article :” Unveiling the Epigenetic Landscape of Our Closest Extinct Relatives: A Tale of Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA Methylation,” by Nobel Laureate Svante Pääbo, Science (4/14) The realm of epigenetics, a relatively young branch of genetics, delves into the intricate interplay between genes and their environment, deciphering how factors beyond DNA sequence influence gene expression. DNA methylation, a key epigenetic mechanism, involves the addition of a methyl group to cytosine bases, altering gene activity. By unraveling ancient DNA methylation patterns, scientists have gained unprecedented insights into the epigenetic landscape of our long-lost relatives – the Neanderthals and Denisovans. Harnessing the power of computational methods, researchers have ingeniously reconstructed the DNA methylation maps of Neanderthals and Denisovans, capitalizing on the natural degradation processes of methylated and unmethylated cytosines in ancient DNA. By comparing these methylatio
Read more

Many Evolutionists can't "evolve" with Epigenetics

Image
M any evolutionists believe that epigenetics challenges neo-Darwinism. Neo-Darwinism is the prevailing theory of evolution, and it states that evolution is driven by natural selection, which acts on random mutations in the DNA sequence. Epigenetics, on the other hand, is the study of changes in gene expression that are not caused by changes in the DNA sequence itself. Epigenetic changes can be passed down from parents to offspring, and they can be influenced by the environment. This raises a number of challenges for neo-Darwinism. First, it challenges the view that natural selection is the only driving force in evolution. Epigenetic changes can occur without mutations in the DNA sequence, so they can provide a way for organisms to adapt to their environment more quickly than natural selection alone can explain. Second, it challenges the view that evolution is a gradual process. Epigenetic changes can be large and sudden , and they can have a significant impact on an
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se
Read more