|
Guestbook / Blogs
God Bless
America
| |
The Accidental Rolex
© Copyright 2005 – WebPastor David Todeschini
You can get a copy of this sermon by clicking this link  
You can get a book containing this sermon by clicking this link 
\
Many of my readers here, have probably
heard this argument before, and I repeat it here with a bit more emphasis on the
mathematics, which if fully understood will completely dispel any doubt about
life arising “by accident” - not only on earth, but anywhere in the known
universe. Once this conclusion is proven, then any argument about “evolution” is
moot, since if life did not arise by accident, it could not have arisen
at all (in the absence of a Creator), and so there would be no
life to “evolve”.
Note that the calculations
here, involve each atom in the known universe, and we will generously err on the
side of caution by a factor of 10,000, and you will see that creation without a
Creator, or design without a designer is patently absurd. We must give a bit of
a math lesson here (I promise to keep it as simple as possible) so that the
following arguments can be seen in their proper context.
Powers of 10: When
zeros in a number become too numerous to count, mathematicians often express the
number as a power. To make it easy, we will only consider Powers of 10. The
number 1,000 has only three zeros, so it is easily written and we call it “one
thousand”. It can also be written as 1 x 102 which is 1 followed by
two zeros, or the number 100. Using Powers of 10 we see that 10 is 10 times 102,
because 103 is the number 1 followed by three zeros = 1,000. The same
is also true for the very large numbers like 1050, which is the
number 1 followed by 50 zeros. 1050 is the number of atoms that are
estimated to exist in the entire known universe. The number 1051 is
ten times that amount (adding just one more zero). Anyone who has a checking
account is fully aware of the significance of zeros, particularly when they
appear to the left of the decimal point. To the casual reader, it might not be
immediately apparent that there is an astronomical (literally) difference
between 1050 and 1054, but the latter is 10(54-50)
or 104 or 10,000 times as large!
The number 1054 represents
approximately 10,000 times the number of atoms that are estimated to exist in
the universe. For the record, this number also takes into consideration the
unaccounted for “dark matter” that is postulated to exist.
To put this into perspective,
even multiple “iterations” or “cycles” of universal collapse and expansion;
i.e.: multiple “Big Bangs” are covered by the number 1054, and so
the “ infinite tries” that evolutionists try to use as a counter-argument to the
cold statistics against their theoretical fantasy, are also accounted for.
You must, at this point, consider only DNA
as a prerequisite to all life in light of the mathematical odds of a strand of
DNA assembling itself “at random” to arrive at the conclusion that life - even a
single cell such as an amoeba, could only have come about by the action of an
intelligent designer. If you examine the evolutionist's arguments carefully, you
will note that there is the presumption of the prior existence of amino acids,
and talk of a “primordial soup” that
is supposed to have been Earth’s oceans billions of years ago. If this is (or
was) so, then only an infinitesimal portion of the universe’s available matter
was involved in the “random” mixing of atoms, which would decrease the odds of
life arising by the “right combination” of atoms (or elements) by a ratio that
is proportional to the atoms in the primordial ocean, and those that were extant
in the entire physical universe. Evolutionists characteristically cite “chance”
or “random mutations”, but never cite the statistical probabilities of it
actually happening. This is no mystery, since statistically, it is impossible
for life to have arisen “by chance”.
The classical (correct)
analogy is to postulate that a wristwatch (or an Intel Pentium computer chip)
could have just as easily (actually more likely because it is infinitely less
complex) happened “by accident”, and so, why not? Why do we not find Pentium
computer chips washed up on the beach, or in the “fossil record”? The answer is
that we don't find them, because “mother nature” does not create complexity out
of chaos.
Life, which is infinitely more complex
than a Pentium processor, is no exception. Evolutionists would have you believe
otherwise. If the astronauts who first set foot on the moon had sifted through
the dust, and found a Rolex watch, what do you think their reaction would have
been? More than likely, the first thought that would have occurred to them would
have been that the Russians got there first, and one of them lost his watch.
That the watch assembled itself at random over billions of years from the
primordial interstellar dust would be the last thing they would propose; if they
did, they would be laughed to scorn. In fact, even a simple object such as a
stone with a few letters carved into it, would have evoked the former reaction
rather than the latter, because humans being designers by nature, recognize
intelligent design when they see it. How ludicrous then, is it to deny that a
Rolex or Pentium processor chip can happen by accident, and in the same breath
rationalize that a living being - even a single cell, which is infinitely more
complex by millions of orders of magnitude, happened by sheer chance?
In legal terminology, such
sets of beliefs are rationalizations that are called (in Latin)
“a non sequitur”,
which means, “It does not (logically) follow”.
As I said at the outset, we
need only consider the odds of a strand of DNA putting itself together from the
available elements or atoms by accident, to disprove evolution, since it cannot
be that life preceded DNA, since DNA is the blueprint by which every living
thing is built. To say that DNA evolved from life, or to make any statement to
the effect that life can (or had) existed prior to DNA, is a postulate even the
most dedicated and articulate evolutionists dare not make, because it would show
the irrational lengths he or she is willing to go to, to deny the obvious, and
believe the ludicrous. National Geographic magazine, commenting on human
DNA, said that the instructions
“if written out, would fill a thousand 600 page books”.
A typical cell is only 1/1,000th
of an inch in diameter, and it contains hundreds of interactive parts, including
the chromosomes that contain the DNA strand - which is coiled into a space
1/10,000th of an inch in diameter, and if stretched out lengthwise,
is over six feet long.
All of the DNA in a typical
adult’s body – consisting of an average 60 billion cells, would fill only two
tablespoons. The strands of DNA, each about 6 feet long, if stretched out and
laid end-to-end, would reach from the Earth to the moon 50 million times! I
think King David said it best in the Psalms:
“I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and
wonderfully made: marvellous are thy works; and that my soul knoweth right well”.
–
Psalms 139:14 KJV
DNA is a digital,
self-replicating, and self-correcting code. Given the four molecular components
(T, C, G, A) of which it is made, human DNA would require 10130
“tries” to assemble itself into the instructions to make a human being. The
number is actually 1080 added to 1050 (1050 is
the estimated number of actual atoms in the universe). We will be extremely
generous, and say that there are 10,000 times more atoms available, and use 1054,
and so this makes the “chances” of DNA occurring by accident orders of magnitude
of “impossible” according to the established scientific definition of
“impossibility”.
This calculation also works
out if the number of atoms in the universe (estimated) is reduced by similar
ratio, since scientists have all agreed that
anything that exceeds the odds of one in 1050 is absolutely
impossible. So we see that even with the billions of years that the
universe is said to have been in existence – 10 billion years works out
to 1018 seconds, and even assuming that the “primordial soup” was
extant at the very instant the singularity exploded, and the life molecules are
combining all during that time, we see that even at the rate of billions of
“random chances” taking place every second, only an insignificant portion of the
requisite “tries” could have occurred, even in those billions of years.
Although rationalization from
ignorance proves nothing, the mechanism or the process by which life is
postulated to have arisen that is proposed by the Darwinist and Evolutionist,
fails at the most fundamental level. There is simply no argument that could be
put forth, that even if more DNA did indeed assemble itself by an extremely
fortuitous set of circumstances, that living creatures over a million different
species, could have appeared in the relatively short time known as “the Cambrian
era”. Where does the raw DNA obtain the material to assemble a single living
being?
For even an amoeba to have
spontaneously come into being of its own is statistically impossible. To have a
million different species of living beings (not counting grass, plants, trees,
fruit, etc.), “evolving” or appearing simultaneously, increases even those
astronomically impossible improbabilities exponentially.
To illustrate this latter point, let
us say that you have 10 marbles numbered 0 to 9 in a cardboard box. Blindfolded,
you attempt to draw out all the marbles in ascending order. The chances of doing
this successfully are 1 in 3,628,800. Each additional species, itself arising
simultaneously with another (i.e.: not evolving from something that
already exists), doubles the already impossible odds of the first arising “by
accident”. Therefore, if the chances of one strand of DNA (say, for an amoeba)
happening by chance are one in 10130, then the chances of an amoeba
DNA and the DNA for a paramecium (both are one cell organisms) happening “by
accident” at the same time (one not evolving from the other) is twice that,
or one in 20130. For a million species, the base number
increases by the same proportion. We can safely say then, that chance played
absolutely no part in the beginning of life anywhere in the universe. This
completely discredits the ludicrous claims of life arriving here on meteors,
aliens from other planets, and all other such nonsense that has been bandied
about by Evolutionists whose own ridiculous postulates militate against them.
There are literally hundreds
of books that one could read – both pro and con, and each one, makes
seemingly convincing arguments for their particular point of view. However, the
choice is clear; either life happened by chance, or
it happened by design. If there is another possibility, I certainly would
like to hear it. If a Rolex watch cannot occur by the random arrangement of
available molecules and atoms, then neither can the beings that designed and
built the watch have been an accident. If the latter is said to be true, then
all that man has done – every building, every work of art, every word
spoken, written, or sung, is also the result of the initial accident that
assembled man from the inanimate stardust of the primordial universe. You cannot
“sit the fence” on this one – not any longer! Failing to explain the
primordial Evolutionist postulate; what must be held as the truth in order to
make the ensuing diversity of life on earth possible; that over a million
different and viable strands of DNA arose practically simultaneously, and each
having independently assembled living, self replicating organisms and diverse
kinds beings, male and female, and all of which to a certain degree or another
are symbiotic, interdependent, and with each species limited to reproducing only
“according to its kind”; that it
happened “by chance” – there is no need to discuss the ancient “chicken or the
egg” paradox.
The
argument about the existence of God is not proven by the absence of knowledge,
but the existence of a designer is in fact proven by irrefutable evidence of the
design, which is, by the Rolex watch definition; “something that could not have
happened by chance”.
Another fabulous argument
against Darwinist evolution is that proposed by Michael Behe in his best-selling
book “Darwin’s Black Box”. Behe’s
argument, which is empirical fact, is that even the smallest bit of life is
irreducibly complex – in other words, if one molecule is removed or altered in
position, the cell or the protein or the amino acid ceases to function, and thus
could not support life.
I have often made the analogy (and
people remember it because it’s gross) that
a snot-booger that a child picks out
of his nose, is thousands of orders of magnitude more complex than the Space
Shuttle.
“Chance” being out of the
picture entirely, leaves us with the only remaining postulate. You might say we
have even made the “chicken or the egg” paradox moot, and replaced it with an
even more complex question, since a chicken or an egg cannot exist without DNA.
We have not even discussed how it is possible for every living thing even grass,
flowers, and trees – each individual, has its own unique DNA fingerprint – yes,
DNA is unique for every tree in the forest; unique for every little guppy and
every huge whale in the ocean, each sparrow and every eagle – all of them – each
individual creature and each individual bit of life on the planet, are all
“alike” or “after their kind” within a species, yet each one exists as if
created individually and on its own.
One can argue not only for the
requisite of a designer for a design to have arisen, but for a purpose for the
designer to have created the design. The purpose of the designer(s) of the
Rolex, was to build the finest timepiece in the world. The design preceded the
creation of the thing designed. Each Rolex, although physically identical with
thousands of others, has unique serial number. Similarly, every living creature
and every living thing designed by God has a DNA sequence that is totally
unique. Of the billions of human beings who have ever lived or are now alive,
not one individual shares 100 percent of his DNA with another. Each one is a
unique individual, which is forensically distinguishable from every other. There
is purpose for this design, although I personally cannot say with any real
certainty what that purpose could be. However, I believe it is safe to say
(tongue-in-cheek) that God does not
maintain a DNA database in heaven.
One could also argue, in light
of recent technology – the cloning of sheep, a cat, and (allegedly) a human
being, that the clone is “DNA identical” with its “parent”. Although this is
true, we have seen that clones did not fare well while they are alive – at least
not as well as the “parent”. While this can be an unforeseen shortcoming in the
technology, or something that is a factor in the environment, remains to be
seen. It perhaps is indicia that physical life – even in animals – is not
the entirety of what comprises “a living soul”.
While scientists try to
unravel the mystery of life coded into DNA, there is no accounting for how the
code actually becomes a living thing or a human being. Evolution being moot by
the fact that life is no accident, all life, or any life arising out of
inanimate matter is also impossible because it violates the second law of
thermodynamics; or the so-called “entropy” law. This immutable law states that
order cannot arise out of chaos. Things in nature, left to their own devices,
always go from order to chaos – not the other way around.
Life, even a simple life form
as an amoeba, is a highly complex thing that cannot spontaneously come into
existence. Life can only come from a “seed” of prior extant life; life has an
“energy” that drives it not only to survive, but also to replicate itself.
A virus is merely a strand of DNA or RNA.
It is not alive in the sense that it is a creature by any stretch of the
imagination. The AIDS virus is a good example. HIV is not “alive”, and therefore
it cannot be killed in the usual sense. HIV, which is simply “code”, requires a
living cell of a particular type – a T-cell – in order to reproduce. Similarly,
if human DNA could have happened by chance, it would presumably have required at
least a cell or biological factories (if you will) in order to copy itself.
However in order to have this cell factory, the DNA to construct (and operate)
the cell, must have been extant.
Which came first, a cell, or the DNA to build the
cell that can replicate the DNA?
Another way to look at this
paradox is this: a single strand of DNA (viable or not) has one chance in 10130
to happen as an “accident”. Once that single strand of DNA, which occupies a
space 1/10,000 of an inch in diameter happens, it must find a living cell that
can only exist by having its own DNA, and is surrounded by the materials
(elements or molecules) with which to construct this “creature” that is coded
into its digital (molecular) instructions. Assuming such a cell did exist, this
single strand of DNA, which is barely visible with a very powerful microscope,
must “happen upon” this requisite cell by (again) “chance”, on a planet capable
of sustaining the life form that its instructions dictate it will “assemble” out
of all the billions of galaxies in the universe.
Life – even an amoeba, “by
accident”, is such an absurd and preposterous idea that it defies any attempt of
eloquence to excoriate. Evolution, which depends upon “accidents of nature”, is
only slightly less laughable. Both of these concepts or theories are not only
literally astronomically absurd, they are an insult to the intelligence of any
scientifically astute individual, but also more importantly, they are an affront
to the dignity of human beings, as well as to the living God who created us
“in his image and his likeness”.
I believe it is safe to
conclude, that the DNA argument must be resolved prior to any subsequent
discussion of “evolution”. It is unlikely that a designer with a design, either
had no purpose for the design, or “walked away” from an absolutely mind-boggling
piece of handiwork.
Particle physics and science
in general, stands today on the edge of absolute revolution. The “red shift” or
Hubbell's law on which Einstein's famous E=mc2
formula, and the entire “Big Bang” theory is predicated is challenged by recent
discoveries that suggest that the speed of light has been slowing down since the
universe first began. If this is so, all the “scientific” textbooks to date are
trash; you wasted your money buying them, and wasted your time reading them.
What you think you know is wrong.
Start over.
If the speed of light
was significantly faster than 186,200 miles
per second (currently), then the universe is much younger than the 11 to 20
billion years currently estimated, which gives “chance” less of an opportunity
and as I suggested here, to arise by a fortuitous “accident” over eons of time
(I should think that there can be no chance smaller than zero).
Getting back to the original
hypothesis that it would take 10130 “tries” for DNA molecule to
assemble itself by chance, this applies only to the odds of the sequence of the
viable code. For this “model”,
we assume that the requisite molecules (amino acids and proteins) already exist,
and are locally available. However, for the purpose of demonstrating the
mathematical absurdity, we do not need to consider this factor, which is
practically incalculable, in order to make the point. A design when proven
leaves us in search of the designer. There is no question as to the design; this
short analysis examines only a single aspect of it – one infinitesimal bit of
data, or a minuscule part of the awesome creation miracle all around us.
Therefore, we are safe in our
conclusion that “God did this”,
and accomplished it via a process that will forever be beyond the scope of our
understanding, and above any fantastic and subjective theoretical speculation.
At a certain point, both
religion and science depend upon faith. A Creationist believes in an infinite
intelligence, which directed, orchestrated, and choreographed the creation of
the universe, while the evolutionist or the secular humanist believes that in
the absence of intelligence with a directed purpose, that everything is possible
if the “dice” are thrown a sufficient number of times. Both points of view are
religions, really; only the latter is not so-called, because Evolutionists are
not gathered together to worship and sing praises to “Lady Luck” or to the laws
of chance. Perhaps they should.
See my book: “The Book of NeoGenesis – The Evolution of Mankind From Rocks” on:
www.Net4TruthUSA.com/NeoGenesis.htm
“As for me in my house”, as Joshua wrote, “we will serve the Lord” – Joshua 24: 15c - KJV
To see a world in a grain of sand
And heaven in a wildflower
Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour.
– William Blake
۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩۩
 FOOTNOTES
|
