Post by The Great Hairy OneIn article
Post by FreeThinkI agree that evolutionary theory is almost certainly factual.
Can
we
Post by The Great Hairy OnePost by FreeThinkget back to intelligent design now?
All right. What would you like to know about it?
The laws of probability will tell you that this universe with all of its
ordered complexity, could not have come into being by chance. To have that
much order and complexity, the universe had to be designed by an intelligent
creator. There is enough coded information in one human chromosome to
fill a small library of books. This had to be designed by an
intelligent creator.
The probability against that happening by chance is very
very high. It's like giving a chimpanzee a typewriter and letting him hit
the keys at
random. The probability against his being able to type a small library full
of books by hitting keys at random is so high that for all
practical purposes you can consider it impossible.
Because of this, there are some scientists and mathematicians who are forced
to
believe in the existence of God by logic alone.
In order for a single cell to live, all of the parts of the cell must be
assembled before life starts. This involves 60,000 proteins that are
assembled in roughly 100 different combinations. The probability that these
complex groupings of proteins could have happened just by chance is
extremely small. It is about 1 chance in 10 to the 4,478,296 power. The
probability of a living cell being assembled just by chance is so small,
that you may as well consider it to be impossible. This means that the
probability that the living cell is created by an intelligent creator, that
designed it, is extremely large. The probability that God created the living
cell is 10 to the 4,478,296 power to 1.
Example: 10 to the 6th power is one million, 10 to the 7th power is 10
million, 10 to the 8th power is 100 million, 10 to the 9th power is a
billion; each time the power goes up by one, the number goes up by ten times
as much. 10 to the 4,478,296 power, is a tremendously large number.
[The probability of this was calculated by Fred Hoyle, famous astronomer and
mathematician.]
The laws conscerning entropy are well established in physics. Entropy is the
measure of the randomness or disorder in a system. Entropy is always
observed to increase in natural physical processes. Natural processes in
science always tend toward more disorder. The idea that the universe could
develope the ordered complexity that it has, by natural processes violates
the law of entropy, that says disorder must increase in natural processes.
Therefore, one must conclude that the complex order that we see in the
universe did not come about by chance scientific processes. It was developed
on purpose by an intelligent creator. God created it.
The law of entropy exists in thermodynamic systems involving heat, that is
true. Entropy also exists as a measure of disorder in a system in
statistical mechanics having nothing to do with thermodynamics. S=klnp + c.
S = value of measure for a system in a given state. P is the probability of
the occurence of that state. K is a fixed constant and c an arbitrary
constant. Heat is disordered energy. Entropy is a broader term describing
either heat or the amount of disorder in a system. The chemical reactions
that you suppose will produce hundreds of thousands of ordered building
blocks of amino acids to produce genes cannot occur by chance processes
because statistical mechanics says that the reactions will tend toward more
disorder. Genes and chromosomes have hundreds of thousands of complexly
ordered parts. Accoording to statistical mechanics this much order cannot
come from chance scientific processes. It had to come from an intelligent
creator.
There are no existing physical rules, that have been observed by science,
that indicate that ordered complexity can evolve by random chance
occurences. In Science there is an observed law of entropy. In all natural
occurences in science, the amount of disorder increases. In other words, the
physical laws that are observed in nature lead to more disorder; they do not
lead to ordered complexity.
The only thing observed to cause more complexity is an intelligence, of some
sort deliberately assembling something together.
Example: A pile of building materials stacked in a pile is hit by a tornado.
When the pieces come down, they do not assemble themselves into a house.
They just fall into a more disordered pile of building materials. An
intelligence must deliberately assemble the materials into a house to get
ordered complexity.
God created the ordered complexity in the universe. There are no observed
scientific processes that can account for it happening by itself.
Natural selection will weed out inferior members of a species according to
environmental requirements. But, this only leads to a species changing to
another variety of the same species known as a subspecies; that is all that
is observed in nature. [Crickets in dark caves become white with no eyes;
also fish in caves.] But natural selection has not been observed to cause
one species to change into another new species. Fish do not change into
amphibians; amphibians do not change into reptiles; reptiles do not change
into mammals. Natural selection cannot account for the origin of the
different species. There are a million missing links in the fossil record as
it has been found. The intermediate stages that would be necessary for fish
to become amphibians, and reptiles to become mammals, have not been found in
the fossils. The fossils show evidence that all of the species were
originally created by God and they did not evolve into one another.
"Biochemical systems are exceedingly complex, so much so that the chance
of their being formed through random shufflings of simple organic
molecules is exceedingly minute, to a point indeed where it is
insensibly different from zero"
- Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, p.3
"No matter how large the environment one considers, lfe cannot have had
a random beginning. Troops of monkeys thundering away at random on
typewriters could not produce the works of Shakespeare, for the
practical reason that the whole observable universe is not large enough
to contain the necessary monkey hordes, the necessary typewriters, and
certainly the waste paper baskets required for the deposition of wrong
attempts. The same is true for living material"
Ibid., p.148
"The trouble is that there are about two thousand enzymes, and the
chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is one one part in
(10^20)^2000 = 10^40000, an outrageously small probability that could
not be faced even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup. If
one is not prejudiced either by social beliefs or by a scientific
training into the conviction that life originated on the Earth [by
chance or natural processes], this simple calculation wipes the idea
entirely out of court"
Ibid., p.24
"Any theory with a probability of being correct that is larger than one
part in 10^40000 must be judged superior to random shuffling. The
theory that life was assembled by an intelligence has, we believe, a
probability vastly higher than one part in 10^40000 of being the correct
explaination of the many curious facts discussed in previous chapters.
Indeed, such a theory is so obvious that one wonders why it is not
widely accepted as being self-evident. The reasons are psychological
rather than scientific."
Ibid., p.130
"All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn
out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it."
- Lee Spetner, "Not by Chance"(Brooklyn, New York: The Judaica
Press,Inc.) p.138
"It appears that the neo-darwinism hypothesis is insufficient to explain
some of the observations that were not available at the time the
paradigm took shape. ...One might ask why the neo-darwinian paradigm
does not weaken or disappear if it is at odds with critical factual
information. The reasons are not necessarily scientific ones but rather
may be rooted in human nature"
- Christian Schwabe "On the Validity of Molecular Evolution", Trends
in
Biochemical Sciences, July 1986, p.282
"The really significant finding that comes to light from comparing the
proteins' amino acid sequences is that it is impossible to arrange them
in any sort of evolutionary series" - Ibid. p.289
"Thousands of different sequences, protein, and nucleic acid, have now
been compared in hundreds of different species but never has any
sequnces been found to be in any sense the lineal descendant or ancestor
of any other sequence." - Ibid. pp. 289-290
"Each class at a molecular level is unique, isolated and unlinked by
intermediates. Thus molecules, like fossils, have failed to provide the
elusive intermediates so long sought by evolutionary biology." - Ibid
p.290
"There is little doubt that if this molecular evidence had been
available one century ago it would have been seized upon with
devastating effect by the opponents of evolution theory like Agassiz and
Owen, and the idea of organic evolution might never have been
accepted." - Ibid pp.290-291
"In terms of their biochemistry, none of the species deemed
'intermediate', 'ancestral' or 'primitive' by generations of
evolutionary biologists, and alluded to as evidence of sequence in
nature, show any sign of their supposed intermediate status" - Ibid
p.293
Duane T. Gish, The Origin of Mammals : If this view of evolution is true,
the fossil record should produce an enormous number of transitional forms.
Natural history museums should be overflowing with undoubted intermediate
forms. About 250,000 fossil species have been collected and
classified?Applying evolution theory and the laws of probability, most of
these 250,000 species should represent transitional forms.
Dr. Walt Brown, In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the
Flood, page 10: Fossil links are missing between numerous plants, between
single-celled forms of life and invertebrates, between invertebrates and
vertebrates, between fish and amphibians, between amphibians and reptiles,
between reptiles and mammals, between reptiles and birds, between primates
and other mammals, and between apes and other primates. The fossil record
has been studied so thoroughly that it is safe to conclude that these gaps
are real; they will never be filled. ---
Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species:
the number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed [must]
truly be enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every
stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal
any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most
obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory [of
evolution].
Dr. Niles Eldredge, paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural
History, "Missing, Believed Nonexistent", Manchester Guardian, 26 November
1978:?
"The search for 'missing links' between various living creatures, like
humans and apes, is probably fruitless?because they probably never existed
as distinct transitional types...But no one has yet found any evidence of
such transitional creatures?If it is not the fossil record which is
incomplete then it must be the theory."
Lyall Watson, "The Water People", Science Digest, May 1982:
"Modern apes, for instance, seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no
yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans?of
upright, naked, toolmaking, big-brained beings?is, if we are to be honest
with ourselves, an equally mysterious matter."
Dr. Collin Patterson, a paleontologist at the Natural History Museum in
Britain, when asked why he hadn't included any illustrations of transitional
forms in his book, Evolution, he replied in a letter: "I fully agree with
your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions
in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have
included them?I will lay it on the line?there is not one such fossil for
which one could make a watertight argument."
"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major
transitions in the organic design, indeed our inability, even in our
imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a
persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."
S.J.Gould. "Evolution Now: A Century After Darwin", 1982, p. 140
Prigogine, a Nobel Prize winning thermodynamicist:
"The probability that at ordinary temperatures a macroscopic number of
molecules is assembled to rise to the highly ordered structures and to the
coordinated functions characterizing living organisms is vanishingly small.
The idea of spontaneous genesis of life in its present form is therefore
highly improbable even on the scale of the billions of years during which
prebiotic evolution is speculated to have occured."
Ilya Prigogine, et al, Nov 1972, Physics Today p. 23-31
TheyÂ’ve also found human and dinosaur footprints in the same rock strata, in
places like Turkmenia, in Nicaragua and near the palaxi river in the US.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Posted Via Uncensored-News.Com - Accounts Starting At $6.95 - http://www.uncensored-news.com
<><><><><><><> The Worlds Uncensored News Source <><><><><><><><>