The word evolution can have many meanings. We use the word evolution here to refer to neo-Darwinian evolution (particles to people). I recently published an article on Challenging All Evolutionists in which I challenged evolutionists to refute any one of the four reasons presented that life did not, cannot, and will not come from non-living components by means of random chance natural processes.
- The Law of Biogenesis confirmed by Pasteur in 1864.
- The failure of experiments like that of Miller in 1953 to show the formation of the required components of life from non-life.
- The mathematical probability of forming the first living cell by random chance processes is beyond possible.
- The information in a cell (DNA) requires an intelligent agent.
No one has refuted any of my four reasons so far. In the May-June 2019 issue of the Answers In Genesis magazine microbiologist Dr. Kevin Anderson wrote an article titled Three Ways Evolution Violates Basic Science. [If you are not a subscriber to the Answers In Genesis magazine, you can sign up for a free account here and then enter the unlock code VENOM to read Anderson’s full article.]
He provides these three violations of basic science.
- The Law of Biogenesis [life comes only from life]
- Biological Information [data and programs in DNA]
- The Laws of Thermodynamics [First and Second].
We know that the Law of Biogenesis has never been falsified. And as I wrote in my earlier article, evolution can’t even get started without the first living cell. Dr. Anderson concludes that “scientists of today have no excuse. Contemporary knowledge of genetics, cell biology, and biochemistry leaves only one scientifically valid conclusion: no known natural process can account for life’s origin. Such a natural process exists only in the imagination of those who deny life was created. Ignoring the Law of Biogenesis is not very scientific, but it is necessary to keep out that annoying ‘Divine Foot.’”
Richard Dawkins acknowledges that “the difference between life and non-life is a matter not of substance but of information. Living things contain prodigious quantities of information.” Information is the basis for life. In my earlier article, I showed that life requires information (data and programs in DNA), machines for storage of information, irreducible complexity (all parts), specified complexity (meaning), and design. Dr. Anderson concludes that “we now see that the enormity of the gap between living and nonliving is absolutely bewildering (and becoming more bewildering with each new discovery). Bill Gates remarked that “DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.” Software requires an intelligent agent; and so does life all the more so.
The First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics are well-established laws of nature. Neither law has ever been falsified. According to the Second Law of Thermodynamics, everything (including living organisms) is running down – unavailable energy (entropy) increases over time. Things go from order to disorder (complex to less complex) over time. The Theory of Evolution requires that things become more ordered and complex over time; simple living organisms become more complex over time. What is the source of the new biological information required to make this possible? Dr. Anderson states that “For all practical purposes, the only biological means of counteracting the consequences of entropy is “specified use” of incoming energy. In other words, the pre-programmed information … directs the cell how to use this energy constructively. Such programming enables cells to use incoming energy to discard, repair, and rebuild, keeping their structures functioning effectively. Without such a biological program, incoming energy simply becomes destructive. The laws of thermodynamics give precious few alternatives.”
The Theory of Evolution violates basic science in the three ways noted above. Evolution is not good science; it is a philosophy.
Comments welcome and solicited.