Mike Paulson on EVOLUTION 

(The Origin of Life)

The theory of evolution has a fatal flaw right at the beginning: it

is impossible to account for the origin of life in the first place.

The popular notion of spontaneous generation was demolished by Louis

Pasteur and others back in the nineteenth century, yet evolutionists

still cling to the idea of "abiogenesis, " the imaginary gradual

development of complex molecules from basic elements until they finally

become replicating molecules, which are then assumed to be living.

Despite much media-induced misunderstanding on this point, no

replicating molecule has ever yet been synthesized from nonliving

chemicals in the laboratory, despite multitudes of costly experiments

attempting to do so.

Yet evolutionists imagine that what cannot be

accomplished by trained scientists with costly equipment in

artificially- controlled environments somehow occurred by

blind chance a billion years ago. Some unknown process operating in an

unknown liquid mixture beneath an unknown type of atmosphere somehow

generated unknown primitive life forms from unknown chemicals, and

that's how life began!

However, life even at the simplest imaginary level is so complex

that the chance for this to happen by accident is infinitesimally

small.

The famous mathematical astrophysicist, Sir Fred Hoyle,

recently argued that the probability this could have happened even once

in the entire history of the universe is roughly equivalent to the

probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard would assemble a

Boeing 747.

Living organisms are known to be structured around a remarkable

system called the DNA molecule (deoxyribonucleic acid), in which is

encoded all the information necessary to direct the growth of the

complete organism from the germ cell. Although the variational

potential in the DNA molecule is extremely large, allowing a wide range

of variation in any given type of plant or animal, it also serves to

insure that such variation will be within the fixed limits represented

in the genetic systems of the parents.

The tremendous amount of

ordered information in even the simplest living organism is so great

that it is almost impossible to imagine that scientists could ever

synthesize it from elemental chemicals, no matter how long they took,

and even more inconceivable that it could ever happen by chance.

Even if a genetic code centered in the DNA molecule could ever arise

by chance, it certainly could never happen more than once. Yet it has

recently been found that there are several different genetic codes

present in certain organisms, and all evidence indicates that each must

have had a separate origin.

The intensive search for even the slightest traces of life on other

planets or in interplanetary space reflects the wistful hope that

evolutionary theory will be vindicated by evidence that life has also

developed somewhere else in the universe. As yet, despite the space

probes, giant telescopes, and even the UFO furor, the idea of

extraterrestrial life remains science fiction and nothing more. There

is not the slightest evidence of biological life as we understand it

anywhere else in the universe.

The fact that almost all living flesh is composed of the same basic

type of molecule (DNA), made up in turn of the same basic elements

(carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, ans so on) found in the earth is

of course a definite confirmation of Scripture. The Bible states

plainly that both plants (Genesis 1:11-12) and animals (Genesis

1:20, 24) were "brought forth" from the earth and its waters, and that

even man's body was formed of "the dust of the ground" (Genesis 2:7).

However, the fact that there was a life principle that was not inherent

in these basic substances is also stressed in the case of both animals

("living creatures, " Genesis 1:24) and man ("living soul," 2:7), and

there is not the slightest evidence that future scientists will ever be

able to synthesize anything corresponding to a "living soul, " nor that

natural processes ever accomplished any such thing in the past.

Of course, from the standpoint of the evolutionists, it is necessary

to postulate some form of spontaneous generation or abiogenesis, for

otherwise they would have to assume a creator. Thus, they continue to

believe in a naturalistic origin of life by sheer blind faith and

against infinite odds, not by scientific evidence at all.

My comment: If evolutionists put as much objectivity and faith in the

Bible as the do in their theory of evolution, there would be no need

for this discussion today because their evidence is presented almost

totally on BLIND FAITH.