The Impossibility of Evolution By: Johnny O. Trail Have you ever considered what it would take for a single celled organism to grow into a multiple cell creature? More specifically, what would it take for a single celled organism to grow into a human being? In addition to contradicting several laws of biology, it would take an extraordinary set of events for a microscopic creature to evolve into a more complex being. When one considers the theory of evolution, it becomes clear that it would take a greater miracle for a single celled organism to evolve into a complex creature than it would take for a person to simply believe in the biblical account of the creation. Consider the following quote from Dr. W.B. Riley: If there are a thousand miles of blood vessels in my body, if there are 1,500,000 sweat glands on its surface, if my lungs are composed of 700,000,000 cells…if my heart beats for a single day were concentrated into one huge throb of vital power it would be sufficient to throw a ton of iron 120 feet into the air…if my nervous system is controlled by a brain that has 3,000,000,000 nerve cells of which 9,200,000,000 are in the cortex or covering of the brain alone…and if in my veins there are 3,000,000 white corpuscles and 180,000,000,000,000 red ones, then it is some job for an amoeba to evolve himself into that complexity I grant! IT SOUNDS TO ME MORE LIKE THE WORK OF GOD! The Psalmist wrote: ‘I will praise thee: for I am fearfully and wonderfully made.’ (Psalm 139.14). From this one can glean several truths. First, evolution is an impossibility. Statistically, it is impossible for a microscopic, single celled organism to grow into a more complex creature. Henry Morris, Ph.D. states: For example, consider a very simple putative organism composed of only 200 integrated and functioning parts, and the problem of deriving that organism by this type of process. The system presumably must have started with only one part and then gradually built itself up over many generations into its 200-part organization. The developing organism, at each successive stage, must itself be integrated and functioning in its environment in order to survive until the next stage. Each successive stage, of course, becomes statistically less likely than the preceding one, since it is far easier for a complex system to break down than to build itself up. A four-component integrated system can more easily "mutate" (that is, somehow suddenly change) into a three-component system (or even a four-component non-functioning system) than into a five-component integrated system. If, at any step in the chain, the system mutates "downward," then it is either destroyed altogether or else moves backward, in an evolutionary sense. Therefore, the successful production of a 200-component functioning organism requires, at least, 200 successive, successful such "mutations," each of which is highly unlikely. Even evolutionists recognize that true mutations are very rare, and beneficial mutations are extremely rare—not more than one out of a thousand mutations are beneficial, at the very most. But let us give the evolutionist the benefit of every consideration. Assume that, at each mutational step, there is equally as much chance for it to be good as bad. Thus, the probability for the success of each mutation is assumed to be one out of two, or one-half. Elementary statistical theory shows that the probability of 200 successive mutations being successful is then (½)200, or one chance out of 1060. The number 1060, if written out, would be "one" followed by sixty "zeros." In other words, the chance that a 200-component organism could be formed by mutation and natural selection is less than one chance out of a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion! Lest anyone think that a 200-part system is unreasonably complex, it should be noted that even a one-celled plant or animal may have millions of molecular "parts." Moreover, systems in the natural universe are in a state of decay or entropy. Entropy is defined as “nature tends from order to disorder in isolated systems.” That is, things are in a state of de-evolution rather than becoming more complex in the natural universe. The aforementioned quote underscores the sheer amount of changes that an organism would have to undergo to become a more complex creature let alone a human being. In contradistinction to evolution, mutations are generally not advantageous. For evolution to work, less complex creatures would have to mutate into more complex forms for them to develop into something other than a one celled organism. Cancer cells are basically mutated cells that are out of control. For evolution to work, even over a period of billions of years, cells would have to mutate at an astounding rate to evolve into any multiple celled creature. Finally, evolution is false because the Bible reveals the true Creator of the universe and humans in particular—God. Genesis 1.1 says, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” As a matter of fact, much of the scripture appeals to the power of God as Creator and names Christ as the preeminent force in the creative process. Colossians 1:13-16 says, “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities—all things were created through him and for him.” Christians should resist any effort to supplant God from His rightful place as Creator and Maker. To do so removes human dignity and changes humans into little more than animals who are just a little higher on the food chain. Works Cited McCord, Hugo (1972). These Things Speak. Pgs. 34-35. Morris, Henry, Ph.D. (n.d.). “The Mathematical Impossibility of Evolution.” icr.org/article/493.
Posted on: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 21:37:17 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015