Evolution or No
Evolution
(or Deal or No Deal)
In the scriptures, there is overwhelming yet simplistic truth.
It would be easy to see the following scripture as if it were written today, as it perfectly describes
us. Yet, Paul prophesied overwhelmingly these truths for the end times,
written just after Christ's death and well before the Darwinian
hypothesis of evolution.
Romans 1: 18 The wrath of God is
being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and
wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19
since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has
made it plain to them. 20 For since
the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal
power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood
from what has been made, so that
men are without excuse. 21
For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor
gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their
foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise,
they became fools
Here we are.
We are informed from some scientists that evolution is a fact.
Well, unless God used pseudo-evolutionary processes to create (which the
fossil record and other evidence actually point against), Darwin and
creation cannot even partially be reconciled. Frankly, the evidence for evolution
is extremely weak. The Bible verses (above and others) leave no
room for a random, purposeless, Darwinian mechanism.
Let us start with the acknowledgement that Darwin's much admired book
was simply racist. We always hear it called "Origin of the
Species". In fact, the whole name is "On the Origin of Species
by Means of Natural Selection, Or the Preservation of Favoured Races in
the Struggle for Life". This is blatant racism,
written in a time less politically correct.
|
Stephen Hawking, the brilliant
theoretical physicist who wrote in his book A Brief
History of Time (who was not a Christian at this
time) said:
"It would be
very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun
in just this way, except as the act of a God who intended to
create beings like us" |
The theory of evolution enlists random events over million or billions of
years to eventually make life. Hmm. Is this even statistically
possible?
Over the course of thousands of years, intelligent man has learned
that life is complex yet it boils down to simple building blocks.
We can manufacture DNA strands but we still cannot make life. If
we look at the DNA building blocks of life, these are formed of
base pairs in a double helix. These are basically four different bases (adenine (A),
cytosine (C), guanine (G) and thymine (T)) linked together to form the
DNA strand. The DNA strand codes for RNA(s) that code for proteins
to be manufactured for the cell functions the myriad of cells make up
tissues that make up a body.
Life gives insight into God's mind. He combines very simple
processes to form highly complex systems. Also said this way
(above): "God's
invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been
clearly seen, being understood from what has been made"
The human genome (chromosomes formed by DNA strands) has been mapped
out over recent years. There are approximately 3 billion bases in
the DNA strands in the human. Although there are a few
nonessential bases, for the most part, life depends on the precise
arrangement of these bases to make the proteins necessary for life.
In general, you must get these in the right order.
Realizing that DNA is only one part of the many processes needed for
life, let's look at this one component of life for evidence that evolution
could be possible. Let's consider the protein insulin, necessary
for glucose regulation. Insulin is a small protein, formed from 51
amino acids linked together (153 bases- with 3 bases per amino acid -
for example "gly"= glycine, can be coded for by one of 4
possible sequences -GGU,
GGC, GGA, GGG).
Any other combination would code for a different
amino acid and likely will change the protein enough so that one may
become diabetic, certainly fatal prior to modern medicine. This is particularly true if more than one
sequence is altered.
There are "start" and "stop" codons that tell
where to begin the coding for RNA. If these are off by even one
dropped base or one added base, it can throw off the entire sequence
such that the protein would not resemble insulin. Some amino acids
have only one group of bases that code for them.
In summary, there are 3 DNA bases code (through RNA) for each amino acid making
up proteins necessary for life, such as insulin. Insulin is just a
small protein, one of many thousands that must be correct for life.
Back to evolution. Remember evolution says we do not need God
to make this work.
For insulin, we need each of 153 DNA bases to be correct. If we incorporate
chance alone to coming up with such a specific sequence, the probability of getting it
right becomes a statistical calculation.
Controlling
for the most variability that could occur within these limits, the
calculation reveals the following probability that the DNA sequence of
insulin could be lined up in the correct sequence strictly by chance (no need for
God):
8.49 x 10-66%
For those not used to using scientific notation, this is a decimal point
before 65 zeros in front of 8.49. This is much, much less than what
might happen in the billions of years people speak about. This
is based on the idea that of the four possibilities, one will be right
each of 153 times. This is a number so low we cannot really
understand it's meaning. Let's try to see it here:
0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000849%
For example, if one has a coin and flips it 10 times, the possibility
of getting heads every time is (½)10=
(0.5)10 = 0.0009765 (9.765 x 10-4) or 0.09765%. Would you
bet your house on this? Are you lucky enough to flip the coin 10
times and every time get heads? Highly unlikely but much greater
chance than that seen for insulin. Even that is much too simple.
As another example, take the game show Deal or No Deal.
The popular
television show is quite entertaining and can also teach us a little
statistical reasoning. Deal or No Deal can be played online here: (http://www.nbc.com/Deal_or_No_Deal ).
Now, as a contestant,
the most favorable outcome would be to pick the case with $1,000,000 to
hold till the end of the game and to have the only other case
representing $750,000 remaining on the board. In this scenario, you
know you would win at least
$750,000, the bank would offer a figure between $750,000 and a million
and there is a 50% chance you would win $1 million. There are 26
cases randomly assigned dollar amounts up to and including the $1
million case. The probability of picking the $1,000,000 case and
then as you play you pick off each of the numbers in order, starting
with $0.01, etc., is 1.191 x 10-20 or 1.191 x 10-18
% . Go ahead, flip the coin and see if you can get 10 heads in
a row. Go ahead, play Deal or No Deal and flip over every dollar
amount in sequence.
The statistical calculation is somewhat different since one can only
get a single dollar amount once. Yet, it is helpful. The
probability of picking the case with $1,000,000 is 1/26= 0.03846 or
3.8%. Quite possible but unlikely.
In fact in scientific studies such as medicine, we claim 'proof' of a
claim based on a 95% -98% or greater probability that 2 things are
related. We are fairly comfortable when there is only a 5% chance
that 2 things could be correlated simply to chance. We consider
the much greater likelihood of a 95-98% true relation between the 2 things and even given
terms like 'proof' that the variable and the system studied are
related. This is considered 'proof' because of a very high
probability that there is a true correlation between
the two things (such as healing after given an antibiotic, etc.), and
not just due to chance.
In reasonable usage, we know that if there is only a 2-5% chance of
correlating observances it is almost proof that it was not by random
chance. Yet these are far more likely due to chance than what we
see in creation. We ignore this intelligent reasoning in our zeal
to believe Darwin and to deny God.
The chances that all the sequences of a small
protein coming together by random possibilities is incredibly small, no
matter how many millions or billions of years we claim it took. By
the way, who was it that made the building blocks of the bases, who
put them together, if you take God out of the equation? Is there
any mathematical reason to "believe" in evolution? No.
You would not put all of your money into a jackpot lottery, hoping to
win. At the same time, the odds of winning such a game is
infinitely greater than just rolling the dice to come up with the
sequence of even the small protein insulin. By the way, who rolled the dice?
Who came up with the atoms and constructed the molecules that are
necessary prerequisites for such a protein?
Examples of probability
| Probability of flipping heads 10 times in a row |
0.09765% |
| Probability of picking $1,000,000 case on Deal or No
Deal |
3.8% |
| Probability of 1 in one million |
0.000001 or 1 x 10-6 |
| Probability of 1 in one billion |
0.000000001 or
1 x 10-9 |
| Probablity of 1 in one trillion |
0.000000000001 or
1 x 10-12 |
| Probability of picking the $1,000,000 case and to then
pick all other 25 cases in sequence on
Deal or No Deal |
1.191 x 10-18
% |
| Working full-time, assuming 15 minutes per Deal or No
Deal game, playing 8 hours a day, 5 days a week,
50 weeks a year, one would play 8000 games per year. At that rate, by chance,
you would get a single game of 26 cases perfectly lined up
in a total of 9.52 x 1017
years. This is, by the way, longer than
billions of years and much more likely than evolutionary processes. |
9.52 x 1017
years |
| Probability that the DNA sequence of a simple protein
(human insulin) was formed by chance |
8.49 x 10-66% |
| Monkeys
typing Shakespeare or even just the word "Hamlet"
It is frequently
stated in books and articles on probability that if a
succession of monkeys were set before a typewriter with
limitless paper, eventually the complete works of
Shakespeare would be repeated by chance. If there are 50
keys on the typewriter, the probability of the monkey
getting Shakespeare correct is raised to the power of the
number of characters (letters and spaces) in Shakespeare
plus the adjustments of the typewriter needed for capitals
and punctuation.
On this basis the
chance of the monkey typing the word 'Hamlet' correctly is
one in 15,625,000,000, so to quote the probability of him
typing the complete works involves a large number indeed.
http://www.peterwebb.co.uk/probability.htm#monkeys |
http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/publicat/primer/prim1.html
God is real. As advanced as we are now, we cannot make even the
most rudimentary forms of life. If we deny Him, we become
"foolish", just as the scripture says.
Don't bet your eternity on such terrible odds.
Copyright © 2006, Dio, Inc.
mailto:diojqa@dutyisours.com
Dio, Inc.
P.O. Box 1811
Pelham, AL 35124
