Part 7: Creation vs. Evolution—What is the probability that evolution is true?
(This blog is part of a series. You can start the series by going back to the September 1, 2014 Introduction called A Case for Christianity: Why do we need one?)
If you found a rare antique pocket watch lying in the forest and picked it up, examining its complexity and marveling at its unique features, which of the following would you infer:
What a creative and intelligent watchmaker there must have been to have made such a beautiful, unique and complex design!
How fascinating it is that the dirt, leaves and microbes just happen to evolve, by natural processes, over millions of years into such a beautiful and complex piece!
-William Paley, Philosopher
In our last two posts we looked at some of the negative evidence for evolution as a means for the origin of complex life. This negative evidence, along with the massive research in favor of intelligent design, puts a doubt into the veracity of evolution’s claims. The detail and immensity of what goes into the organization and structure of a living creature is beyond what evolution is able to explain. Teaching high school students these past twenty-some years, I have been awe-struck with how they approach learning with very little questioning of the things they are taught. I find that most are trusting of their education and much of what they believe to be true is shaped by what previous teachers have said and done, very little is shaped by their own investigation of the material that is presented to them. I have found that when they discover alternative ideas they are eager to debate and they want to know what is true. It is sad that you will not find in the public school textbooks any thought provoking information concerning the theory of evolution even though there is reputable research available that would provide for great discussion and debate. This alternative research is not just philosophical but has hard-core science with mathematical evidence that goes against the probability of evolution as the means for the complex life we see today.
Science uses mathematics as proof in reporting results of investigations and experiments because it must show statistical probability at certain levels to gain acceptance in the scientific literature. This would be the same idea in a court of law when trying to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. What happens when evolution, as a means for the origin of complex life, is subjected to statistical analysis for probability?
Evolution theory states that given enough time and chance all of the life forms we see today came from a non-living chemical spark that resulted in a functional protein needed to build a living cell. What is the mathematical probability that life could have occurred this way?
Walter L. Bradley, Mechanical engineering professor at Texas A&M University and co-author of the book The Mystery of Life’s Origins has said:
- Since evolutionary scientists have estimated the age of the universe at 14 billion years old and the earth being less than 5 billion years old (if we give them that timeframe) the mathematical odds of assembling a living organism, even if you optimize the conditions here on earth in those early days, wouldn’t work.
- If you took all the carbon in the universe and allowed it to chemically react at the most rapid rate possible, and left it for a billion years, the odds of creating just one functional protein molecule would be one chance in 10 with 60 zeros after it! What does that number look like?
- That’s one chance in…
Francis Crick, Nobel prize winner and co-discoverer of the molecular structure of DNA, has said:
- To produce the miracle of molecular construction, all the cell needs to do is string together the amino acids (which make up the polypeptide chain of DNA) in the correct order. This is a complicated biochemical process. Suppose the chain is about 200 amino acids long and, since we have just twenty possibilities at each place, the number of possibilities is twenty multiplied by itself some 200 times. This is conveniently written 20 to the 200th power, that is, a 1 followed by 260 zeros? This number is quite beyond our everyday comprehension.
- To create this one single strand of DNA is mathematically one chance in…
- To simplify, the astronomical odds of complex life forms developing over the course of the earth’s history, astronomer and mathematician Fred Hoyle has said:
The current scenario of the origin of life is about as likely as the assemblage of a 747 by a tornado whirling through a junkyard.
- To sum up the evolutionist’s view we can quote the great philosopher Jim Carey in “Dumb and Dumber” (after being told he had only one chance in a million to date a girl he liked)… That means there is a chance!!!
It certainly is a long way from one cell to the human brain, but the journey may be even longer from nonliving chemicals to the first cell. That’s the most difficult problem for Darwinists. Where did the first life come from? – Norman Geisler and Frank Turek, I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist
They know the truth about God because he has made it obvious to them. For ever since the world was created, people have seen the earth and sky. Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God. -Romans 1:19-20
Let me know what you think: Should students be allowed to examine all available evidence for questions such as origin of life? Why, or why not? If you have been following this blog regularly, where do you think the evidence is pointing?
Come back next week for: Who are we, where did we come from and why are we here? Part 8: Creation vs. Evolution—12 things Evolutionists cannot answer, but must.
Over the next several blogs I am going to continue to present logical reasoning and sound scientific evidence not found in the public school textbooks.
Always be ready to give an answer for the hope that you have in Christ Jesus as Lord. 1 Peter 3:15