Skip to main content
Origins
  “For since the creation of the world His
 invisible attributes, His eternal power and
 divine nature, have been clearly seen, being
understood through what has been made, so
        that they are without excuse. ”
                 (Romans 1:20)




  Evolution and Information
“Some would claim the answer to these
    questions is that there is a God who
chose to create the universe that way. It is
  reasonable to ask who or what created
   the universe, but if the answer is God,
     then the question has merely been
deflected to that of who created God. In
  this view it is accepted that some entity
   exists that needs no creator, and that
entity is called God. This is known as the
 first-cause argument for the existence of
     God. We claim, however, that it is
possible to answer these questions purely
  within the realm of science, and without
         invoking any divine beings.”
            – Stephen Hawking
           The Grand Design
A Quick Overview of Evolution




1.   For this discussion, we’ll use the following definition: Biological evolution
     attempts to explain the change in existing biological entities and their
     progression over time
2.   Micro-evolution describes the changes within a specific type/species
3.   Macro-evolution is a major evolutionary transition from one type of organism
     to another occurring at the level of the species
4.   Survival of the fittest (coined by Herbert Spencer) is argued as to its
     definition, but is normally understood to be 'natural selection', or the
     preservation of favored races/species in the struggle for life.
“In grammar school they taught me
that a frog turning into a prince was a
fairy tale. In the university they taught
  me that a frog turning into a prince
                was a fact!”
            - Ron Carlson
A Quick Overview of Evolution




“Large evolutionary innovations are not well understood. None has
  ever been observed, and we have no idea whether any may be in
         progress. There is no good fossil record of any.”

                               - Paul Wesson

By contrast, micro-evolutionary variations due to mutation and natural selection
 have been and are observed. Postulating an unobserved designer is no more
     unscientific than postulating unobserved macro-evolutionary steps.
Naturalistic Philosophy’s Assertions




1. Biological evolution is incompatible with the existence of a
   Creator
2. Biological evolution accounts for the existence of all of life’s
   complexities
3. Natural selection is a blind, automatic process with no purpose
4. Natural selection is the explanation for the existence of all life
Is Evolution the Answer?

Does evolution answer
the critical question of
  existence – why we
have something rather
  than nothing? And
  does it explain the
  specific complexity
     found in life?
Is Evolution the Answer?
“An atheist before Darwin could have
    said, following Hume: "I have no
   explanation for complex biological
  design. All I know is that God isn't a
good explanation, so we must wait and
 hope that somebody comes up with a
  better one." I can't help feeling that
such a position, though logically sound,
   would have left one feeling pretty
 unsatisfied, and that although atheism
   might have been logically tenable
    before Darwin, Darwin made it
possible to be an intellectually fulfilled
                 atheist.”
           - Richard Dawkins
Is Evolution the Answer?

      “It seems to me that Richard Dawkins
   constantly overlooks the fact that Darwin
   himself, in the fourteenth chapter of The
Origin of Species, pointed out that his whole
  argument began with a being which already
  possessed reproductive powers. This is the
      creature the evolution of which a truly
 comprehensive theory of evolution must give
 some account. Darwin himself was well aware
 that he had not produced such an account. It
now seems to me that the findings of more than
 fifty years of DNA research have provided
 materials for a new and enormously powerful
               argument to design.”
    - Anthony Flew, philosopher and former
                      atheist
Does Evolution Mean No Creator?




                                      No.
     First, we have seen that evolution only deals with existing beings. Second,
evolution purports to be a biological mechanism. God is regarded to be a personal
Agent who, among other things, designs and creates mechanisms. And there is no
  reason randomness cannot be part of a mechanism – for example, software uses
 random number generators and such all the time. Just as you would not conclude
   that a robotic car factory did not evolve, but was designed, in life, perhaps the
                       intelligence is one step removed as well…
Does Evolution Mean No Creator?

 “Either half of my colleagues
 are enormously stupid, or else
  the science of Darwinism is
       fully compatible with
conventional religious beliefs. . .
     Science simply cannot
 adjudicate the issue of God’s
possible existence. We neither
 affirm it nor deny it; we simply
     can’t comment on it as
             scientists.”
     - Stephen Jay Gould
Does The Fossil Record Help?
     “The number of intermediate
varieties which have formerly existed
     on the earth [should] be truly
   enormous. Why then is not every
    geological formation and every
   stratum full of such intermediate
 links. Geology assuredly does not
 reveal any such graduated organic
 chain; and this, perhaps is the most
obvious and gravest objection which
   can be urged against my theory.”
          - Charles Darwin

  “I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil for which one could make a
                        watertight argument [for macro-evolution]”
                                      - Colin Patterson
The Fossil Cover Up




 In 1889, Charles Doolittle Walcott made a major fossil discovery in
   the Canadian Rocky mountains. In rocks too old to contain fully
   formed, complex biological entities, Walcott found some 60,000
 fossils of that type. Walcott knew that there was not enough time for
evolution to produce such entities from square one – all had appeared
                     simultaneously and fully formed.

  Such a finding challenged Darwinian gradual evolution, so Dr.
 Walcott hid all the findings in his lab in 1909. At the time, Walcott
          was the Director of the Smithsonian Institute.
The Fossil Cover Up
  When Walcott’s fossils were re-
  discovered in the mid-1980’s, the
 effect was very dramatic. In 1992,
  Scientific American was moved
 years later to print a story about it
   and ask the question “Has the
  mechanism of evolution altered?”

  National Geographic, the New
  York Times, and Time all printed
stories speaking of “Evolution’s Big
               Bang.”

  Yet today, high school biology
 textbooks mostly ignore this data
       and its implications.
Does The Fossil Record Help?




“The history of most fossil species includes two features particularly
inconsistent with the idea that they gradually evolved:
1. Stasis – most species exhibit no directional change during their
   tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking pretty
   much the same as when they disappear, morphological change is
   usually limited and directionless.
2. Sudden appearance. In any local area a species does not arise
   gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears
   all at once and ‘fully formed’”
                             - Stephen Jay Gould
“The most thorough study of
 species formation in the fossil
    record confirms that new
 species appear with a most un-
     Darwinian abruptness.”
       Dr. Richard Kerr
"Did Darwin Get It All Right?"
   Science, 267:1421, 1995

    Comment on article: (1) The reality of
   sudden saltations in the fossil record or
 "punctuated equilibrium" implies that those
 unfound transitional fossils beloved by the
gradualists are truly missing. (2) The higher
the taxonomic level, the more silent the fossil
  record. There are few clues as to how the
major divisions of life (the phylla) originated.
What about the Archaeopteryx?
  The archaeopteryx is held up as the
    perfect example of a transitional
 species – feathers on wings speak of
the bird, but it had jaws and teeth, not a
  beak, so it seems to also be a reptile.
However, many scientists now believe it
            was simply a bird.

 Interestingly, in Leviticus 11:18, birds
    are listed and one of them is the
 tinshemet. Then in Leviticus, reptiles
  are listed, and the tinshemet appears
again. Evidently, the Scripture felt the
animal fell into both categories and was
        a single animal, not a macro-
             evolutionary entity.
“The fossil evidence that challenges this
 classic concept of evolution has been found
 worldwide. . . . All body plans represented in
   the thirty-four animal phyla extant today
 appear as a single burst in the fossil record.
    And it happened 530 million years ago.
Those are the data. No one disputes them. . . .
One of the great mysteries of animal evolution
is why no new phyla have appeared since that
          Cambrian explosion of life.”
          - Dr. Gerald Schroeder
Evolution’s Main Argument




    “The reason we know for certain we are all related, including bacteria, is the
       universality of the genetic code and other biological fundamentals.”
                                – Richard Dawkins

 This doesn’t rule out a Creator at all. Perhaps everything has similarity because it
      has a common designer and source vs. a common ancestor. Similarity and
  progression does not automatically imply common ancestry. While some studies
  show that humans and chimps have DNA similarities approaching 90-95%, the
similarities between humans and mice is 90%. All humans DNA are 99.9% identical.
Similarity vs. Progression




Does the similarity between these items mean that one evolved from the other?
                Did the pot evolve from the spatula or spoon?

The DNA code – ATCG – implies similarity but does not mean they evolved
 from each other. For example the following letters in the two sentences are
         identical, but a slight difference yields opposite meanings:

                    Charles Darwin was a scientific god
                    Charles Darwin was a scientific dog
A Common Source for Life

 “Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after
their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after
             their kind”; and it was so. ” (Genesis 1:24)

“Out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field
and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what
 he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature,
                        that was its name. ”
                           (Genesis 2:19)

 “Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and
breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living
                               being. ”
                            (Genesis 2:7)
Look Designed?


   “Living objects . . . look
     designed, they look
  overwhelmingly as though
they’re designed. Biology is
  the study of complicated
    things which give the
 impression of having been
  designed for a purpose.”
     - Richard Dawkins
A Quick Correction on ‘Intelligent Design’




“Intelligent Design” may strike you as a curious expression
     – don’t we always think of ‘design’ as the result of
    intelligence? Therefore the adjective “intelligent” is
                        redundant.
The Difference in Data & Information
DNA Is Information like software

“At first approximation, one
    can therefore think of
  DNA as an instructional
 script, a software program,
 sitting in the nucleus of the
cell. Its coding language has
 only for letters (or two bits,
    in computer terms). A
particular instruction known
   as a gene, is made up of
 hundreds or thousands of
        letters of code.”
     Dr. Francis Collins
Randomness in Software…?




If there is one thing a software developer does not want, it is
    randomness in their code. One misplaced semi-colon or
   letter can cause a program that consists of ten thousand
                        lines to not work.
DNA Is the Result of Intelligence
  “It is important to understand
   that we are not reasoning by
      analogy. The sequence
hypothesis applies directly to the
 protein and the genetic text as
 well as to written language and
    therefore the treatment is
     mathematically identical.”
     Dr. Herbert P. Yockey,
             Biologist

 “DNA did not create life; life
        created DNA”
 - Barry Commoner, Biologist
DNA – Genetic Code

  “Investigations of many
organisms, from bacteria to
 humans, revealed that this
  ‘genetic code’, by which
 information in DNA and
  RNA is translated into
  protein, is universal in all
known organisms. No tower
of Babel was to be allowed
 in the language of life. . . .
How deeply satisfying is the
digital elegance of DNA!”
    Dr. Francis Collins
“If you’re trying to explain an event in the remote past you
should rely on our knowledge of the cause/effect structure
of the world and you should be looking for a cause that has
    the capability or power to produce the known effect in
question. It is the principle of sufficient or adequate reason.
Darwin’s mentor Charles Lyell gave this to him. Lyell put it
 this way: ‘In investigating the past we should be looking for
    causes now in operation’. Now as to Information and
  intelligence: What is the cause now in operation of digital
  information? That is intelligence. By using Darwin’s own
 principle of reasoning, we can use an inference to the best
        explanation: intelligence produces information.”
                  - Dr. Stephen Meyer
Evolutionists Admit Information

  “What lies at the heart of
every living thing is not a fire,
warn breath, nor a ‘spark of
life’. It is information, words,
 instructions. . . . Think of a
     billion discrete digital
characters. . . . If you want to
 understand life think about
   information technology.”
       - Richard Dawkins
Evolutionists Admit Information




Darwinist Richard Dawkins admits that the message found in just
the cell nucleus of an amoeba is more than all thirty volumes of the
Encyclopedia Britannica, with the entire amoeba itself having as
   much information in its DNA as 1,000 complete sets of the
 Encyclopedia Britannica. The important thing to understand is
 that the makeup of these entities is not random, but instead the
                  information is highly organized.
“In no way can the concept of
‘information’, the concept of conveying a
  message, be articulated in terms of the
 concepts of physics and chemistry, even
though the latter can be shown to explain
   how the molecular machinery (DNA,
  RNA, and protein) operates to carry
                information.”
    - Arthur Peacocke, Theologian and Scientist
Confusing ‘basis’ and ‘implication’

 “What the media wants to do is say if
you believe that the intelligence we see
    in life is God then you are doing
   religion and not science. Not true.
 Scientific reasoning and evidence are
    being used in Intelligent Design.
 These have implications that go past
     the mere scientific. The media
confuses the basis for intelligent design
  with the implications of the theory in
           order to stigmatize it.”
           - Dr. Stephen Meyer
Design or Chance?




            One Design

            One by Chance?
Pushing Out the Problem Doesn’t Help
     There are two possibilities for
intelligence: it is either transcendent or
immanent. You see design in the fabric
    of the universe; not the result of a
 creature in the universe but something
  beyond it. Dawkins proposes space
aliens for the reason we see intelligence
   here but he also says that the alien
would have had to have evolved as well.
   The problem is if you can’t get the
    evolutionary process to solve the
information process here on earth, why
    think it could happen elsewhere?
Kicking it to outer space doesn’t help.
          - Dr. Stephen Meyer
With all the evidence
pointing to intelligence
behind the information
we see in life, why don’t
 atheistic evolutionists
  admit what is really
         there?
A Battle of Worldviews – Theism vs. Naturalism




 “I am not an agnostic. I am an atheist. My attitude is not
based on science, but rather on faith. . . . The absence of a
 Creator, the non-existence of God is my childhood faith,
           my adult belief, unshakable and holy.”
               - George Klein, Immunologist
A Battle of Worldviews – Theism vs. Naturalism




“In China we can criticize Darwin, but not the government;
    in America you can criticize the government, but not
                          Darwin.”
           - Jun-Yuan Chen, Palaeontologist
“The world needs to wake up from
  the long nightmare of religion. . .
  Anything we scientists can do to
weaken the hold of religion should be
done, and may in fact be our greatest
    contribution to civilization.”
    - Steven Weinberg, Nobel Laureate
No Design but Intelligence?

 “Biologists must constantly keep
in mind that what they see was not
   designed, but rather evolved.”
          - Francis Crick

  “Given the weaknesses of all
 theories of terrestrial genesis,
   directed panspermia [the
  deliberate planting of life on
 Earth by aliens] should still be
considered a serious possibility.”
        - Francis Crick
Atheists Know Intelligence When they See it
   ‘Contact’ was a movie based on a novel by atheist Carl
Sagan. It was about scientists searching for intelligent life in
 space. Before long, the project does, indeed, discover the
first confirmed communication from extraterrestrial beings, a
repeating series of the first 261 prime numbers (a sequence
of prime numbers is a commonly predicted first message from
      alien intelligence, since mathematics is considered a
  "universal language," and it is conjectured that algorithms
    that produce successive prime numbers are sufficiently
complicated so as to require intelligence to implement them).

      “Incidentally, is it not to be wondered at that our
archaeologist immediately infers intelligent origin when faced
 with a few simple scratches whereas some scientists, when
   faced with the 3.5 billion letter sequence of the human
genome, inform us that it is to be explained solely in terms of
                   chance and necessity?”
       John Lennox, PhD, Mathematics, Philosophy
Scientists Know Intelligence When they See it




   “If science is based on experience, then science tells us that the
 message encoded in DNA must have originated from an intelligent
   cause. What kind of intelligent agent was it? On its own, science
cannot answer this question; it must leave it to religion and philosophy.
 But that should not prevent science from acknowledging evidences
        for an intelligent cause origin wherever they may exist.”
                      - Dean Kenyon, Biophysicist
God or Evolution of the Gaps?


“Your protein defies the laws
of mass action – evolution did
 it! Your complicated mess of
 chemical reactions turns into
   a chicken – evolution! The
 human brain works on logical
  principles no computer can
   emulate? Evolution is the
             cause!”
      – Dr. John Lennox
The Teleological Argument




The teleological (telos, from the Greek word which means
 “design” ) argument says that the universe and mankind
        exhibit marks of intelligence and design.

       •Behind every complex design is a designer
       •The universe has a complex design
       •Therefore, the universe has a designer
“I think the origins of the laws
 of nature and of life and the
 Universe point clearly to an
   intelligent Source. The
 burden of proof is on those
 who argue to the contrary.”
    – Anthony Flew, former
       outspoken atheist
Origins
  “For since the creation of the world His
 invisible attributes, His eternal power and
 divine nature, have been clearly seen, being
understood through what has been made, so
        that they are without excuse. ”
                 (Romans 1:20)




  Evolution and Information