Saturday, 8 December 2012

The Universe – by Chance or by Design?

         Pre-Charles Darwin, faith in a Creator went virtually unchallenged, the only disputes being those relating to Church doctrine and Bible interpretation. And for many years after HMS Beagle dropped anchor following its epic five-year journey, God remained in the ascendancy; even converts to evolution continued to believe He had triggered the entire process, sitting back on the sixth day to watch how life unfolded. 

       Times have changed. Over the last century, modern atheism has gradually but effectively used Darwin’s theory to try and eradicate the Almighty altogether, leaving all but the strongest faiths faltering with uncertainty. The British government has proved a powerful accessory to the secular cause by insisting on evolution being taught in all state-funded schools and universities. While still selling itself as a God-fearing nation, America too has its detractors, as atheists reject religious symbols, prayers and any practices which may indicate the existence of a Divine Being. 
      
So is the world now sinking into complete Godlessness? Has the hand that parted the Red Sea been cut short? Have we relegated the Bible to the SciFi/Fantasy section of the library?

      Scientists deal in facts. So let’s do that. Let’s examine a few facts which may redress the balance.

Precision

       Subject to physical laws and natural constants that seem uniquely tailored to support the planets, and contrary to Big Bang or Chaos theories suggesting it all just happened by accident, our Universe is so finely-tuned that even the slightest changes could destroy life on earth. Electromagnetism, gravity, strong nuclear force and weak nuclear force affect everything in the planetary system, working together in perfect harmony to keep whole galaxies in their place.

      Think about it: How could NASA chart a course for a rocket without the precision of the planets, allowing them to time their orbits to a millionth of a second? How else could astronomers predict the next eclipse or meteor shower? As it is, the sun, moon and stars have a set pattern to keep themselves and the earth rotating smoothly. Did they evolve, or is there a superior intelligence out there?

      Many scientists agree with John Polkinghorne, previously a physicist at Cambridge University: “When you realize that the laws of nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.” 

      This view is supported by Australian physicist Paul Davies who says: “There is no doubt that many scientists are . . . scornful of the notion that there might exist a God, or even an impersonal creative principle.” He added: “Personally I do not share their scorn. . . . I cannot believe that our existence in this universe is a mere quirk of fate, . . . an incidental blip in the great cosmic drama.”

Complexity

      Of all the proofs put forward as evidence of design, this for me is perhaps the most telling. The sheer complexity of DNA, for instance, resulting from countless chemical reactions, shows the odds of it forming spontaneously are so small, it would be mathematically impossible. Yet every living organism is made up of countless complex parts, all dependent upon other complex parts for their existence.
  
       Take a single human cell. Within its membrane walls, several components need to be in place for the cell to split and reproduce itself: 1) The nucleus or control centre; 2) The nucleolus, where ribosomes are formed; 3) Ribosomes where proteins are created; 4) Chromosomes which contain DNA, the genetic masterplan; and 5) Mitochondrion, the production centre for energy-supplying molecules. 

       Quite an assembly. Yet, without just one of the above components, the cell would simple wither and die. Which poses a dilemma for evolutionists. How can a cell grow into a human or any other species if it cannot divide? How can it divide unless all the components are in place at the same time? How, in fact, could a cell form with other cells to create a human being or any other species? 

       Even if it were possible for a human male to evolve, what are the chances of a female counterpart evolving at the same time in order for them to reproduce? 

       Coming back to DNA, it's been described as a 'feat of engineering', packaged within the chromosomes so efficiently it beggars belief and containing all the instructions required to build a human body and keep it functioning for a lifetime. DNA's capacity for storing information exceeds anything produced in computer science; if human computer experts are unable to match this capacity, then how could mindless matter? (See The Origin of Life*) 

The missing missing link

       What about the fossil record, to which many refer as proof of evolution? Where are the host of intermediate relics which link one species to another? The fact is, despite many hoaxes, there is still no definite proof and some scientists believe the current evidence for Darwin’s theory is weak.

       In his book Darwin’s Enigma, Aerospace engineer Luther D. Sutherland wrote: “The scientific evidence shows that whenever any basically different type of life first appeared on Earth, all the way from single-celled protozoa to man, it was complete and its organs and structures were complete and fully functional. The inescapable deduction to be drawn from this fact is that there was some sort of pre-existing intelligence before life first appeared on Earth.”

       Donald E. Chittick, a physical chemist, says: “A direct look at the fossil record would lead one to conclude that animals reproduced after their kind as Genesis states. They did not change from one kind into another. The evidence now, as in Darwin’s day, is in agreement with the Genesis record of direct creation. Animals and plants continue to reproduce after their kind. In fact, the conflict between palaeontology (study of fossils) and Darwinism is so strong that some scientists are beginning to believe that the in-between forms will never be found.”

http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Enigma-Luther-Sunderland/dp/0890512361

*http://www.jw.org/en/publications/books/The-Origin-of-Life-Five-Questions-Worth-Asking/#?insight[search_id]=38122c94-7ee6-47af-9cd1-901edf2f4de2&insight[search_result_index]=0


4 comments:

  1. Development after Big Bang is neither random nor accidental. It all follows physical and chemical laws of matter and energy.

    Would any other result be possible? From Big Bang, to development of matter, and stars and planets and galaxies, no.

    So why call it chance?

    I gather you've really not spent a lot of time studying these issues in science. I urge that you do. Science generally grew out of necessity and human curiosity, neither of which is ungodly. Western science has strong roots in Christian tradition of seeking the truth, to understand God.

    Leaving that background out, then leaping to a conclusion that science is anti-God, creates a thick fog of misinformation. That is not godly at all, and not at all part of Christian tradition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not equating Godlessness with science. On the contrary. Where the Bible touches on science it is extraordinarily accurate, describing the water cycle, the 'circle' of the earth, the 'stretching out of the heavens' and many other physical laws which were discovered by humans centuries after the Bible was written.
      Evolution is not scientific. It is an unproven theory that can never explain the complexity, detail and intelligence of the earth - or indeed, the universe.

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete