MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBILITY OF EVOLUTION Lesson 8

image_pdfimage_print

Lesson Eight

Remember this as we continue through the course; true science is facts that have been substantiated by observation, or reproduction with corresponding results to that being tested.

Science = knowledge

Scientific method – Method of research with defined steps that include experiments and careful observation. And, –Tests the hypothesis

Hypothesis – suggested explanation for an event, which can be tested.

Scientific Theory= A scientific theory is a generally accepted, thoroughly tested and confirmed explanation for a set of observations or phenomena.

Laws = concise descriptions of parts of the world that are agreeable to formulaic or mathematical description.

Again, first scientific theory to explain something that exists, Scientific method, is the way we test the theory that leads to Hypotheses, or tentative explanations and when all testing confirms the theory you have becomes scientific law… 2 + 2 = 4 is a mathematical fact, and a scientific fact and therefore a “law”.

Anthropic principle:  The earth was designed for biological life, Scientists have discovered that the most fundamental characteristics of our earth and cosmos are so finely tuned that if just one of them were even slightly different, life as we know it couldn’t exist, and it agrees with the Bible which states that God formed the earth to be inhabited (Isaiah 45:18).

1st law of Thermal dynamics: The law of conservation of energy states that the total energy of an isolated system is constant; energy can be transformed from one form to another, but can be neither created nor destroyed.

2nd law of Thermal dynamics says, in simple terms, entropy (Entropy is the general trend of the universe toward death and disorder…)  always increases. This principle explains, for example, why you can’t unscramble an egg.  In other words, it is dying…

Uniformitarianism is the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now, have always operated in the universe in the past and apply everywhere in the universe.

So True Science comes within all these Boundaries…. Apologetics is a defense that God exists proven by scientific principles and laws:

The earth is finely tuned, yet running down, and there is only a certain amount of energy that exists even though it may be changed from one for to another, for instance when gas is burned it is turned into carbon dioxide, Creation fulfills these laws and principles according to correct scientific procedure.

Finally, we find modern science confirms scripture.

 

Lesson Aim:

We continue with “The Body”

THE BODY

The Eye

One of the most forceful evidences of design within the human body is the eye. Even Charles Darwin struggled with the problem of an organ so complex as the eye evolving via naturalistic processes. In the Origin of Species, he wrote:

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, sees, I freely confess, absurd in the highest sense (1859,p.170)

However, despite his misgivings, Darwin went on to argue that the eye had, in fact, been produced by natural selection through an evolutionary process. Darwin, of course, is not the only one to be troubled by what appears to be obvious evidence of design in the eye. Evolutionist Robert Jastrow has written:

The eye is a marvelous instrument, resembling, a telescope of the highest quality, with a lens, an adjustable focus, a variable diaphragm for controlling the amount of light, and optical corrections for spherical and chromatic aberration. The eye appears to have been designed; no designer of telescopes could have done better. How could this marvelous instrument have evolved by chance, through a succession of random events? (1981, pp. 96-97, emp. Added).

Though Dr. Jastrow argued that “the fact of evolution is not in doubt,” he nonetheless confessed: “…there seems to be no direct proof that evolution can work these miracles…It is hard to accept that evolution of the eye as a product of chance” (1981, pp.101,97,98, emp. added)

Considering how extremely complex the mechanism of the eye is known to be, it is easy to understand why Dr. Jastrow would make such a comment. Light images from the environment enter the eye (at approximately 186,000 miles per second) through the iris, which opens and shuts like the diaphragm of a camera, to let in just the right amount of light. The images move through a lens that focuses the “picture” (in an inverted form) on the retina at the rear of the eyeball. The image is then picked up by some 137 million nerve endings that convey the message (at over 300 miles per hour) to the brain for processing. Little wonder that secular writers are prone to speak of “the miraculous teamwork of your eye and your brain” (Guinness, 1987, p. 196). In fact, the vocabulary of such writers becomes rather unguarded when contemplating this phenomenon. Bioengineer John Lenihan has suggested: “The eye is an exceptionally sensitive optical instrument displaying many striking features of design and performance; even the windscreen washers and wipers have not been forgotten” (1974, p. 75 emp. Added). Since Dr. Lenihan is an evolutionist, his terminology cannot be dismissed as some kind of creationist jargon.

The eye frequently is compared to a camera. Evolutionists Miller and Goode have suggested: “The living camera of the eye photographs fleeting images by the thousands, between on moment and the next, and it makes its own adjustments, automatically and precisely, with each change in distance light, and angle” (1960, p. 315). Actually, the camera was patterned after the eye—a fact admitted even by evolutionists. The Time-Life science series volume, The Bod, spoke of the camera as a “man-made eye” and conceded that this optical instrument was “modeled” after the design of the eye (Nourse, 1964, p. 154). Indeed, the eye does display many striking features of design. The eye is infinitely more complex than any man-made camera. It can handle 1.5 million simultaneous messages, and gathers 80% of all the knowledge absorbed by the brain. The retina coves less than a square inch, and contains 137 million light-sensitive receptor cells, 130 million rods (allowing the eye to see in black and white), 7 million cones (allowing the eye to see in full color).  In an average day, the eye moves about 100,000 times, using muscles that, milligram for milligram, are among the body’s strongest. The body would have to walk 50 miles to exercise the leg muscles an equal amount. If the function of the camera demands that it was “made,” does it not stand to reason that the more complex human camera, the eye, also must have had a Maker?

The Ear

Another incontrovertible evidence of design within the human body is the ear, which is composed of three areas: outer, middle, and inner. Sound waves enter the outer ear (at a speed of 1,087 feet per second) and pass along a tube to the middle ear. Stretched across the tube is a thin membrane, the eardrum. The sound waves hit this tissue and cause it to vibrate. The resulting vibrations then are conveyed into the inner ear where they in turn vibrate three small bones – the hammer, anvil, and stirrup (popular names derived from the shape of these bones) that are joined together and operated by tiny muscles. The result is that the sound is amplified.

These bones, which one authority says “are designed to transmit even very faint sounds, “(Sedeen, 1986, p.280, emp. Added), are connected to another membrane called the oval window. As the oval window vibrates, it generates movement within a small spiral passage, the cochlea, which is filled with liquid. The vibrations within the cochlea are picked up by some 25,000 auditory receptors and transferred as electrical impulses, by means of the auditory nerve (within its 30,000 nerve fibers) to the brain. The brain receives these vibrations (up to 25,000 per second) and interprets them as voice, thunder, music (more than 1,500 separate musical tones), or as the thousands of other sounds that we hear daily. The complexity of this integrated system is nothing short of amazing. One writer noted: “Amazingly, the inner ear, although no bigger than a hazelnut, contains as many circuits as the telephone system of a good-sized city” (Guinness, 1987,p.208). Would anyone suggest that a city’s telephone system could design itself? Dr Lenihan even went so far as to remark that the “level of sensitivity” within the human ear is “far beyond the achievement of any microphone” and “represents the ultimate limit of performance” (1974, p.87).

The cochlea contains three tubes, called the semi-circular canals, which are partially filled with fluids that move whenever the head moves. Nerve endings from these canals are connected to the brain and this, in cooperation with the muscle system, helps us keep our equilibrium or balance. The balancing ability of the auditory system has been compared to the “inertial system used in missiles and submarines” (Lenihan, 1974, p. 90). Thus, the ear mechanism actually is designed to accomplish two functins—hearing and balance. This feature of the body demonstrates incredible planning. In the words of Lenihan, “The combination , in such a small space, of the hearing and balancing systems of the body represents a remarkable achievement of biological engineering” (1974, p. 94, emp added). Does “blind nature” have the ability to engineer such remarkable technology?

The psalmist affirmed that God “planted the ear” and “formed the eye” (Psalm 94:9). Hearing and seeing are not developments of an eons-long evolutionary process. “The hearing ear, and the seeing eye, Jehovah has made even both of them “ (Proverbs 20:12). “Our eyes and ears are transformers. They sense the light and sounds around us and turn them into electrical impulses that the brain can interpret. Each organ is designed to handle its own medium” (Sedeen, 1986, p. 276, emp. Added) Designed indeed! And such design speaks eloquently of a Grand Designer.

We have spent the last three lessons on the Body, and we could have three more lessons or more, but it’s time to move on… but just keep in mind we didn’t mention the Skeletal System, The Circulatory System, or The Nervous System which includes the powerplant for it all; the brain.

 

I would also like for us to keep our minds on lesson 1 which demonstrates the mathematical impossibility of evolution of even one 200 part system, and then fast forward to each of the individual systems and organs we have examined in the last three lessons and realize the absurdity of evolution…

So let’s have a short review lesson one

Consider the chance of accidental development of a very simple system composed of only 200 integrated parts (simple compared with living systems)  the probability of forming such an ordered system is 1 in 200 factorial, or 1 chance in 788,657,867,364,790,503,552,363,213,932,185,062,295,138,977,687,263,294,742,533,244,359,449,963,403,342,920,304,284,011,984,623,904,177,212,138,919,638,830,257,642,790,242,637,105,061,926,624,952,829,931,113,462,857,270,763,317,237,396,988,943,922,445,621,451,664,240,254,033,291,864,131,227,428,294,853,277,524,242,407,573,903,240,321,257,405,579,568,660,226,031,904,170,324,062,351,700,858,796,178,922,222,789,623,703,897,374,720,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

This colossal number can be written more simply as 1 chance out of 10 to the 375th power of selecting the proper arrangement for a 200-part integrated system on the first trial.

But what if we keep on trying different combinations over and over again? Won’t we eventually achieve the desired result?

Well, to begin with, there are only 10 to the 80th power electrons in the known universe. Assuming this to be the maximum number of parts available to work with, without attempting to go through a lot of numbers here (as if we haven’t already done that) let me put it in a way that we can understand the impossibility of this ever happening.

If we could try various combinations attempting to get the right number for this 200-part integrated system at 1 billion per second, in other words, every second of the day we could try one billion combinations of the parts how many hours do you think it would take to come up with the right combination?

If we take that number and give scientists 30 billion years (the age some scientists say is the age of the earth) , attempting to randomly come up with this number at the rate of 1 billion per second, we would still be far short of enough time for the odds to come through.

Now the scientists might argue, that one part was built upon another part, in other words, evolved, however that makes the numbers even worse. The numbers of probability actually increases, and in short, makes this whole process mathematically impossible. We’re back trying to get a nickel out of our 2 + 2 pennies.

Let’s add to their problems, a 200 part system is a ridiculously primitive element compared with living systems. Modern research by NASA has demonstrated that the most basic type of protein molecule that could be classified living is composed of at least 400 linked amino acids. Each amino acid, in turn, is made up of a specific arrangement of four or five chemical elements, and each chemical element is itself a unique combination of protons, neutrons and electrons. Golay has demonstrated that the chance formation of even the simplest replicating protein molecule is 1 in 10 to the 450th power.

Wysong has calculated the probability of forming the proteins and DNA for the smallest self-replicating entity to be 1 in 10 to the 167,626 power, even when granting astronomically generous amounts  of time and reagents, who can imagine what the chance formation of a more complex structure or organ such as the cerebral cortex in the human brain would be?  It contains over 10,000,000,000 (ten thousand million, 10 billion) cells each of which is carefully arranged according to a specific design, and each of which is fantastically complex in itself!

Schutzenberger of the University of Paris at a conference on “Mathematical Challenges to the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution, “ concluded that the probability of evolution by mutation and natural selection is inconceivable.

  1. What is the American definition of Apology? ___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  2. What is the Greek definition as used in 1 Peter 3:15 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  3. What is the foundation of Science? _________________________________________________
  4. What is Scientific method? __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  5. What is the one word definition of Science ? __________________________________________
  6. Describe the Scientific method ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  7. What is a Hypothesis ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  8. Describe Scientific Theory ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  9. What are scientific Laws ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  10. What does scientific theory explain? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  11. Give a simple explanation of the Anthropic principle ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  12. What is the 1st law of Thermal dynamics ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  13. What is the 2nd law of Thermal dynamics ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
  14. Explain Uniformitarianism ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

The articles by the Prisoners do not reflect the view of this website but are published intact as the prisoners write them, however comments are welcome