Special Edition Monthly, News for Greenfield and Hancock County Indiana
Main Menu
| Home |
| About |
| Search |
| Archives |
| Media Kit |
| Contact Us |
| Links |
| Political Updates |
Quote
“Yesterday is gone. Tomorrow has not yet come. We have only today. Let us begin.”
Latest Events
| No events |
| The Anvil - By Design |
|
|
|
| Written by Tracy Gray | |||||
|
Last month, we discussed the premise behind Ben Stein's new movie, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. We discovered that scientists who support (or for that matter mention) Intelligent Design are being “black-listed” and often have their careers ruined by the “scientific” establishment - often simply for doubting the ability of Darwinian evolution to explain the scientific facts they are seeing. This month, I would like to look at just three areas of science that are causing many scientists to doubt evolution and believe in the possibility of a Designer: Cosmology, Molecular Biology, and Paleontology. And remember, we are just scratching the surface… Cosmology Scientists know that the universe is expanding. Therefore, they also know that it must have had a beginning. Couple this with the known scientific law that matter is neither created nor destroyed on its own, and this alone becomes powerful motivation for admitting the intervention of a Designer. Second, scientists know that the universe is filled with exquisite order. Many of the physical laws that you and I live by and take for granted are evidence of this order. And order implies intelligence not chance. Physicist Paul Davies admitted the following: “The temptation to believe that the Universe is the product of some sort of design, a manifestation of subtle aesthetic and mathematical judgment, is overwhelming. The belief that there is 'something behind it all' is one that I personally share with, I suspect, a majority of physicists.” In addition, Albert Einstein said: “The harmony of natural law...reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.” Third, there is a principle known by scientists as The Anthropic Principle. This principle basically says that if there was the slightest change in the structure of the universe, life could not exist. For example, take the orbit of our earth around the sun. We all know that it is a circular orbit. What if that orbit were elliptical? As the earth moved around the sun, its elliptical path would bring us perilously closer or further away from the sun depending on its place in that orbit at a given time. Anybody notice with our “perfect” circular orbit around the sun how hot it gets in the summer and cold it gets in the winter here in the Midwest? Imagine with an elliptical orbit what it would feel like if we were brought just a fraction closer or farther away from the sun. We would burn up or freeze. The Anthropic Principle indicates that the design of our universe is just too perfect to have happened by chance. Molecular Biology In addition to Cosmology, Molecular Biology is increasingly revealing the handiwork of a Designer. When Charles Darwin and his contemporaries were first toying with their evolutionary ideas, the common belief was that a single human cell was very simple. They could not have been more wrong. Scientists now know that a single human cell is vastly more complicated than anything mankind has engineered - ever! A single cell, far from being simple, is extremely complex. In fact, a single cell's DNA has four times the amount of coded information as an entire set of the Encyclopedia Britannica. And DNA deals with this coded information in highly sophisticated ways. The question is, “Where did all of this highly sophisticated information come from?” Increasingly, many scientists are admitting that an Intelligent Designer is the likeliest answer. Dr. Stephen Meyer earned his Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of Science from Cambridge University and is now a Senior Fellow and Program Director for the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute. His research in Molecular Biology has led him to the following conclusion: “Everything we know from our uniform and repeated experience is that information always comes from an intelligent source. So when we find information in the cell in the form of the digital code in DNA, the most likely explanation is that DNA also had an intelligent source.” So, what is the probability that a single living cell could be formed by random chance? No matter how many millions or billions or years are figured in, when such a scenario is run through a computer, the result is always the same: Zero. Impossible. Sir Frederic Hoyle, a famous British astronomer was formerly an atheist. However, his scientific studies led him to reject his atheism: “A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.” Fred Hoyle, “The Universe: Past and Present Reflections.” Engineering and Science, November, 1981. p 8-12 Hoyle likened the possibility of a single cell forming by blind chance to the possibility of 1 x 10 to the 50th blind people solving a scrambled Rubik's cube at the same instant. Not likely. Paleontology Finally, evolutionary theory suffers some of its worst blows from a source that most would consider to be its greatest friend - the fossil record. The lack of transitional fossils (i.e. half one species, half another) has left evolutionary scientists scratching their heads. The challenge for evolution is this: If all forms of life came from one simple cell millions of years ago, then don't we see this transformation in the millions of fossils that have been unearthed over the years? Where are the fossils representing those creatures in the midst of evolving from one species to another? They don't exist. Some of the most damning statements for evolutionary theory come from Charles Darwin himself. For example, regarding this lack of transitional forms, Darwin said: “But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth? .... if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory.” Charles Darwin, “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection”, The Modern Library, New York, p. 124-125 Evolutionist Steven M. Stanley states: “The known fossil record fails to document a single example of phyletic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition...” In other words…If is unreasonable to believe that the universe came into being on its own; if it is filled with unexplainable order; if the complexities and inherent intelligence coded in living cells cannot be explained by random chance, and if the witness of the fossil record contradicts evolution but testifies to what we should see if each species was created whole and intact as Genesis 1 says, then why is it so hard for so many to believe what was told us long ago… In the beginning, God created…” | |||||
|
|||||
