An Astonishing Situation.

As we live somewhat ordinary day-to-day lives, from time to time something I find astonishing comes up on the news bulletin. Like the announcement that the space probe Rosetta had caught up with the comet 67P/C-G and throughout its rendezvous with it, about to orbit the rock on a triangular course, even to to find a suitable site for its robotic landing of its sibling Philae - not easy, as such a lump of rock flying through space is anything but spherical, let alone providing a landing pad. Rosetta was launched from near Kourou, in the South American State of French Guinea, on 2nd March, 2004 - the very same day as the birth of our second daughter. For the last ten years, this vehicle hurtled through space to purposely meet with the chosen comet to find out whether it holds any clues to the origins of life on Earth.

 

This idea originated from the theory that comets and other heavenly bodies contain the molecule which makes up the animo acids which from which all life originates, to put it simply. No doubt about it, the project is the product of human intelligence - the magnificence of the human mind, the ability to make decisions, and the possibility to solve extremely complex problems using mathematics and physics, making the human brain an astonishing marvel!

Other great ideas, other than the invention of the wheel, includes the discovery of Penicillin in 1928 by Dr. Alexander Fleming at St. Mary's Hospital in London. Like any normal human, he accidentally left open a Petri dish containing the culture of Staphylococcus bacteria - and like a discarded slice of damp bread, it wasn't long before common mould began to develop in the dish, causing a reaction with the bacteria, which such discovery led to the antibiotic Penicillin, a saviour-drug for multiple thousands of patients, particularly those who had contacted venom through sexually-transmitted diseases. This led me to think that such an act of apparent clumsiness or forgetfulness on the part of the scientist can allow nature to take its course and perform acts which we humans can consider miraculous. 

 

Medicine, for me anyway, can be a fascinating study. While the pre-Renaissance Western world was still languishing with life-threatening diseases, it was known that other cultures of the world, such as in the Far East and the American Indian, were familiar with various herbs which had medicinal powers. And although I had read articles in the past that the origin of medicine was connected with the occult, really it occurred to me that the only occult were the ritual dancing and religious beliefs which accompanied the healing of the patient - particularly among the Native Americans - but had these rituals not taken place, the herbs would have still have had their healing properties.

 

Then there was good old Dr. Hippocrates, who practiced at the Greek island of Kos in the 5th Century BC. He did not believe in surgical operations, as he thought that dissecting the body was against the will of the gods. But like the American Indian, he prescribed drugs gotten from various herbs, and even had in-patient wards where the sick can be observed while on medication. On the same grounds as the hospital, various temples dedicated to certain divinities were used for the sick to pray, and to offer sacrifices to the gods. Even in our modern hospitals, there is always a chapel found in the premises, but far less obvious and significant than the huge temples which dominated Hippocrates' day. The astonishing similarity of treatment over 2,400 years has allowed the Hippocratic Oath to be taken by medics even to this day.

 

Hospital of Hippocrates, the Asklepeion, Kos -taken October 2011

 

But the wonder of these natural herbs providing healing powers - including Penicillin which was gotten from a common mould, and that without accompanying religious rituals - demonstrates the love and mercy of God in such divine provisions. But even at present, when many of the medicinal drugs used at present are synthetic rather than natural, by his provision of the original herbs, we can thank the Lord for his mercies when it comes to healing of illnesses.

And so going back to the subject of the Rosetta Space probe, a stupendous result of a group of ingenious minds working together - then not to mention scores of other human creations and engineering feats, from the microchip which controls an intricate yet powerful computer, to the delicate mechanism of a wristwatch, made with precision to keep time accurately, right up to the mega-structures of civil engineering, such for example, the magnificent Sydney Harbour Bridge in Australia, or a railway tunnel bored through solid rock under the English Channel. Let's face it, modern engineering and technology has not only made day-to-day living much easier for us, but has also expanded our horizon of knowledge our forefathers would have never imagined.

Yet in the case of the Rosetta space probe - the very purpose of such a project will be to gather information for clues whether life here on Earth had its origin from outer space. This is a theory originally conceived by Sir Fred Hoyle, a brilliant astronomer and mathematician. Hoyle was an atheist, who rejected the idea of the Big Bang as the proposed theory for the origin of the Universe, and instead, advocated the steady state, which means that the Universe had existed from eternity past, and like a flowing river in which every water molecule is on the move, the river itself remains endless. Hoyle had much trouble reconciling Darwin Evolution with his own research on cell biology. For example, he used the probability of the enzyme, part of the protein chain formed within the nucleus of a cell, to calculate the impossibility of having evolved without divine intervention. He worked out that the probability of just the enzyme itself having evolved to its present form by chance is one out of one, followed by 40,000 zeroes! With such a mathematical result, Hoyle was forced to conclude the reality of divine creation - or come up with some other theory. In this case, to him life on Earth was the result of animo acid molecules entering the primeval ocean, itself formed by comets consisting of ice colliding with the primeval Earth.

Millions was spent, many, many man hours went into the designing, construction and launch of the Rosetta, to find out whether Fred Hoyle was right with his theory. It took a further ten years for the probe to catch up with the comet, and from the time of writing, it will be a further three months before Rosetta launches its sibling, the Philae, for a robotic landing on the comet itself to gather enough information to see how close to the truth this scientist had been. Suppose the comet does consist of ice, and animo acid molecules were found in the rock? Wouldn't this be a massive victory for Darwinism, and the Bible proved false after all?

That is precisely what these brilliant, academic minds are after. The final answer to the origin of life without the need for a God to stick his oar in. Atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris would also rejoice. The Bible would at last be thrown into the dustbin of history and mythology, and as John Lennon wrote and recorded his song - we can imagine a world without Heaven above, nor Hell beneath us, and no religion either. A perfect Utopian society.

This is what I find to be an astonishing situation. All over the world, brilliant, well educated minds abound, many engaged in creating new ideas, the latest inventions, and into medical research. Others study the stars to find out just how we got here. Still others were able to design a robotic vehicle which can carry out meticulous tasks millions of miles out in space. It is so incredible that even throughout history, we can see the wonders of the human mind and imagination. For example, around seventeen years previous to this, I found myself at The Chesters, one of the best preserved Roman sites in the UK, possibly of all of Europe other than the ruins of ancient Rome and Pompeii. The Chesters was a major Roman fort on Hadrian's Wall which marked the northern boundary of the entire Empire. What I have found intriguing were the well-preserved latrine system, a set of holes at a bench where water used to flow in a channel underneath. Also there was evidence of sanitary items existing. The whole structure would be still fully functional to this day had the watercourse beneath had not dried up. As with the Roman city of Aquae Sulis (now Bath Spa) the Romans were superb with plumbing and the hypocaust heating systems for their homes, their utility buildings, and their leisure centres.

 

Chesters Roman Fort, Hadrian's Wall, UK.

 

What a difference all this to our nearest cousins, the Primates, from which we supposed to have evolved from. It has been observed that the best they can do is use a large stone to crack a nut. It is a far cry from even the simplest of structures even a child can make. But our academics prefer to believe that we as Homo Sapiens are members of the Primate family, at one with the monkeys, apes, gorillas and chimpanzees. In the world of science, the Bible is ruled out.

It is this hostility to the truth of the Bible which lie behind the Rosetta space probe, along with other branches of science, particularly in Historical Geology and Paleontology. The universities in Britain and Europe became an intellectual battlefield particularly during the nineteenth century, with the likes of Charles Lyell, Jean Baptiste Lamarck, and Charles Darwin, along with others, throwing down the gauntlet against the Biblical truth of Divine Creation. Of all literature ever written throughout history, it seems odd to me that the truthfulness of Holy Scripture had so much opposition thrown at it, yet we as a nation hold a reverential respect for the highly educated, and applaud them for the ability in launching rockets into space, particularly for the purpose to disprove the reliability of the Bible.

Maybe the near-universal hostility of Scripture might have been stirred up by passages like this:

For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written:
I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.
Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of the age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believed.
Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness o God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.
1 Corinthians 1:18-25.

Spot on, Paul! Maybe it was because of what you have written that clever men of our age had sent a very expensive, highly technical device to look at a lump of rock in the sky.

Evolution, Panspermia and Creationism.

Before I discuss further in this series, I first feel obliged to thank one of our commentators, Bryce, for his input. Having received a Bachelor of Science degree in Biology, he is a qualified scientist, who, I realise, would know much more about the working of the cell than I would, as discussed in the last blog. Therefore, where credit is due, he is to be commended for spending time discussing these issues with a commoner such as myself, here on this website.

I was not accusing Bryce of being a subscriber of the ancient astronaut theory, especially of the sort expounded by Erich von Daniken. Instead I was discussing that the idea of all life having an extraterrestial origin, such as the case of the Murchison Meteorite having amino acid molecules, as being taken seriously by some evolutionists. That does not mean that Bryce must also believe that that was how life must have originated. But the idea of Panspermia, as this branch of science is called, does hold a lifeline for the theory of Evolution, and then at its very beginning. As Bryce himself admitted, he and his colleagues are still in the dark on the very beginnings of the theory, namely, the evolution of the cell itself.

Bryce was also surprised that I did not bring up the "Tornado creating a Boeing 747 while passing through a metal scrapyard" argument. Personally, I think such a way of reasoning used for discrediting Evolution to be rather childish, therefore unworthy of any discussion here. Yet it was Fred Hoyle himself who had invented the "Boeing 747" theory. And even though Hoyle denied that the cell could have ever evolved by chance due to mathematical impossibility, yet he remained an atheist who embraced Darwinian Evolution once it got underway.

Let us re-cap on what Fred Hoyle believed. He was a Darwinian, but rejected any possibility of the single amoeba-type cell evolving on its own by chance. He then calculated that the chance of just the enzymes evolving by chance is one out of one, followed by 40,000 zeros! First, let us give a practical demonstration of what this means:

There are 60 seconds in a minute, in one hour - 3,600 seconds. In 24 hours - 86,400. In one year, i.e. 365.25 days - approximately 31,557,600 seconds. Bryce talks about the beginning of evolution taking place some 2,000,000,000, or two billion years ago. By multiplying two billion with 31,557,600 - which is the approximate number of seconds in a year - we get 63,115,200,000,000,000. Now this is way, way short of the 40,000 digit number calculated by Hoyle. We can go further with the microsecond, the nanosecond and even the picosecond, but this won't be necessary, as such results would still fall short of the 40,000-digit figure.
(Here the American billion is used.)

Therefore it would not have been possible for the vastly complex structure of a whole cell to have evolved by itself. There isn't simply enough time throughout the entire age of the Universe for the cell to have evolved without outside influences. That is why the idea of amino acid molecules in the Murchison Meteorite, and even a fossil imprint of a fully evolved bacteria, such as found in the ALH84001 Meteorite discovered in Antarctica, 1984, has been a kind of "saviour" to the theory of Evolution. Scientists such as Dr. Richard Hoover embraces the idea that what was discovered was a fossilised imprint of an alien bacteria.

An image of how an alien bacteria found on the ALH84001 Meteorite may have looked.

The possibility of such organisms traveling through space, then reproducing and starting the process of evolution when the environment is right - in our case the Earth's primeval oceans - is known as Panspermia. After examining the facts connected with this theory, I get the impression that it is not unlike a spore, too small to be seen with the naked eye, settling on a piece of sliced bread left in a warm, moist environment. After a short time, from this spore, a large area of green mould has spread across the slice. In the evolutionary sense, it is grasping on straws in a desperate attempt to save the theory from its impending doom. If the theory cannot be saved, then the possibility of Intelligent Design would be the only alternative, unless the theory of Panspermia can be proven as fact. Although Fred Hoyle was a strong believer and supporter of such a theory of living cells traveling through space, many other scientists, including those in the field of Paleobiology, rejected such a theory as pseudoscience, and put it aside as a lunatic fringe together with von Daniken's Ancient Astronaut theories.

If Intelligent Design is not acknowledged, and at the same time, the theory of Panspermia is also rejected, this leaves one in a bit of a dire situation when it comes to solving the issues of Evolution, particularly the functions within the cell, as given in my last blog. To quote a couple of examples from Michael J. Behe:

A single flaw in the cell's labyrinthine protein-transport pathway is fatal. Unless the entire system is entirely in place, our ancestors would have [died]...Attempts at a gradual evolution of the protein transport system are a recipe for extinction...
At some point this complex machine had to come into existence, and it would not have done so in step-by-step fashion...as Darwinian evolution would have it.
Source: Michael J. Behe, Black Box, P. 114-115.

The cumulative [evidence] shows with piercing clarity that life is based on machines - machines made of molecules...[which are] enormously complex...The complexity of life's foundation has paralyzed science's attempt to account for it....Faced with such complexity with even simple phenomena, Darwin's theory falls silent.
Source: Michael J. Behe, Black Box, p. 4-5, 97.

Bryce, in his last comment, then challenged me to bring proof of Creation by Intelligent Design. I was surprised to read such a statement at this stage, as surely, by giving a description of the genome system within a cell's nucleus, and the mRNA, the Ribosome and the extreme complexity of the resulting polypeptide, one of in a protein chain, I would have thought that this was good evidence of intelligent design. In fact, the very idea of needing a "saviour" in the form of Panspermia, or cosmic cells splashing into our primeval oceans while riding on meteorites billions of years ago - even this testifies that for the cell to exist in the first place, it must have came fully evolved, or else no life would exist in the present day!

Such a concept gives rise to another, I would think, a very serious problem, that of Infinite Regress. That is, to ask: If Darwinian Evolution took place due to the arrival of traveling cosmic cells into our oceans, then how did they evolve? What were the cells which sparked life into them, and so on ad infinitum? Hoyle, who saw this as a problem, attempted to solve it by suggesting various chemicals, such as hydrogen, helium and other materials in the newborn stars of the young Universe giving rise to amino acids, the building blocks for protein. In other words, the basis of all life began with the formation of the stars themselves. This is a fascinating interpretation on the origins of a fully functional, highly complex living organism. It has really goes to show how far in one's determination one can go to push away the screaming obvious - intelligent design! As Paul the Apostle wrote, that their minds have become darkened until futile - see Romans 1:18-23, especially verse 20.

But Fred Hoyle was an atheist and a supporter of Darwinism, and to utterly reject any concept of Divine Creation, he gave full support to the theory of Panspermia. To note, Hoyle was an astrophysicist and brilliant mathematician who was also a professor at Cambridge University. So he was no fool, and unlike von Daniken, he did not attempt to use a degree of dishonesty to propound his theories, as mentioned in my last blog.

But to turn to the Bible for proof of Intelligent design, this would require faith. This is because of what we are really doing is turning to a written record of past events and allowing ourselves to be told how these events transpired without visual proof on how these events took place.

The narrative of the six-day Creation of Genesis chapter one provides a good example. Here we are told on a Hebrew day-by-day process of Creation by intelligent design. The "evening and morning" of day one, two, three and so on up to day six depicts the new day beginning at sunset, as in the Hebrew clock to this day. Then on the seventh day, so the narrative goes, that God rested from the work of Creation, and hallowed the 7th day, which became the reason for the 4th Commandment given in Exodus 20:8-11, that the 7th day of the week must be kept holy by the children of Israel, to whom it was delivered.

Bryce was right when he commented that the weekend was likely to be around before any of the Bible was written. It was divinely introduced at the very birth of history. But on the scientific side, the 7th day of rest testifies that the forces that were at work during the Creation Week are not in operation now. As another commentator has pointed out, the material world at present is subject to decay, starting from a high order of things and slowly declining towards disorder, a fact known as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In other words, nothing lasts for ever. One good example is this very computer I'm using to write this blog. There will be a day that I'll be needing to replace it. As for myself, soon to enter the 7th decade of life, (my sixties) I would not be surprised at the slow decline of body defence mechanisms which are vital for sustaining good health.

But the idea of a Limited Evolution is not denied by us Creationists. The number of animals in the Ark of Noah does shed some light on this issue. Take a look at the Canine family. Here some species are listed along with their chromosome numbers. (As a yardstick, humans have 46 Chromosomes in the nucleus of each cell.)

African Wild Dog....78 Chromosomes
Dingo...............78
Domestic............78
Coyote..............78
Golden Jackal.......78
Hyena...............40
Wolf................78

With the exception of the Hyena, every species of the Canine has 78 chromosomes. Closely related to the Dog is the Fox, of the related Vulpos family. However, there is a greater variation of chromosome count as listed here:

Ferret Fox...........64
Grey Fox.............66
Red Fox..............34
Tibetian Sand Fox....36
Bengel Fox...........36

Although there is a variation of Chromosome count here, there is a belief among Creationists that all of these species could have evolved from just one pair - a male and female. On the other hand, the Vulpos family of the Fox could have had its own ancestor. Whatever may be, it is not impossible that evolution within its own kind has taken place and is taking place at present. It is also noteworthy that the domestic cat, the lion and the tiger all have 38 Chromosomes, which lends to a rather fascinating idea that the Feline family began as a single pair, but here the separate species within this family could not be more diverse. On the other hand, in the Primate family the Gorilla, the Chimpanzee and the Orangutan all have 48 Chromosomes, just two more than us.

Further listing say, of the Equine family would include the Horse, Quagga, Zebra, Zebroid (a cross between a Horse and Zebra), Onager, Kiang, Ass and the Kianger (a cross between a Kiang and Onager).

Bryce believes that the the Ark of Noah is so nonsense that he rates ancient astronauts and cosmic cells as being more plausible than the Biblical account. Yet I have listed up to 26 species from as little as four different families or kinds. The idea that 26 species (and not all were named, particularly in the Primate and Feline groups) came from just four pairs not only makes Noah and the Flood more plausible than Panspermia, but it also looks at the high chance that the Bible is friendly toward a limited form of Evolution within the confines of each separate kind.

This is the kind of limited Evolution Bryce and his colleagues use as evidence to support the impossible theory of Darwinism.

A Small Block To The Reality Of Evolution

Although there is a lot to discuss here, I will try to keep this blog as short as possible
***************************************************************************
In my last two articles, I was approached by a commentator, Bryce (I hope he doesn't mind me using his screen name here, else I would need to edit). He discredited my views on Biblical Creation when I wrote in the first of the two blogs, Our Eternal Home when I made the suggestion that man and Dinosaurs co-existed within the same time frame, rather than millions of years apart. In my second article on this subject, Answer To An Evolutionist, I gave what was a history lesson, as Bryce called it, and reminded me that I made no referral to the subject of Evolution on a biological sense. He also challenged me to mention incidents in the Bible which could not occur in real life - such as a talking snake or someone coming back from the dead. I finished my last blog with the words, In my next blog I will show something that will shatter the entire theory of Uniformitarianism, on which evolution rests. Watch this space.

As for incidents in the Bible, I will answer that because Bryce had never seen a talking snake, or for that matter, a talking donkey (Numbers 22:28-31). Neither had he ever seen someone rise from the dead. He is walking by sight, not by faith. The Bible itself tells us that faith is believing, and hoping for things not yet seen (Hebrews 11:1-2). Like the skeptics alive during Leonardo Di Vinci's day, who laughed at his suggestion that one day man will fly, and so developed a contraption with flapping wings. When the prototype of the plane fell to the ground, people turned away, shaking their heads. And who would ever thought that one day a small box would play music and sing songs without anybody inside the box or standing near it?

I ended my last blog about Uniformitarianism, because in the days of Darwin, and in the many years to follow, Lyell's Uniformitarian Geology of stratified rocks were classified by the fossils found in them. The famous "Index Fossil" - that of the Trilobite which was found in the Cambrian rock stratum, was one classic example explaining the theory of evolution. Darwin and his followers knew nothing of microbiology, the study of the cell, as the microscope was of a later development. Had he known, it would have been most likely that Darwin would have recanted on his new evolutionary theory. As such, the topic of this blog has been changed from Uniformitarian Geology to that of Microbiology, in answer to Bryce's concern. And I hope it won't be too long for the reader.

Bryce likened my Creationist views, to my mind, to that of pseudoscience, when he asked whether I really believed "with a flick of his finger, God was able to bring life into existence" and then went back on himself when realising that it was not good for Adam to be alone, without a mate, and performed an operation using anaesthetics to put him into a deep sleep. Why not just snap his fingers and - wolla! - Eve comes into existence? Why the rib? Perhaps God did know better - that woman coming out of man would result in a much more intimate relationship. Unfortunately, sin had spoiled this relationship to the point in bringing in divorce laws. But this was not originally intended.

Pseudoscience, or false knowledge. That, I believe, is how Bryce sees my views of Creationism. As total nonsense. But it can be very popular. Author Erich von Daniken had acquired a fame with his book Chariots of the Gods? (1968), still in print today. Here, von Daniken puts forth a theory that around 40,000 years ago our planet was visited by a race of super-human space gods, who allowed primitive man to see their advanced technology. Two cases of this is found in the Bible. First, von Daniken insisted that the tabernacle built by Moses was a radio transmitter through which he can communicate with the gods. That despite the fact that this transmitter was an extremely primitive construction for a race of interstellar space travelers! Then there was this helicopter, so according to von Daniken, that was seen by the prophet Ezekiel (Chapter 1). A proof without doubt that aviation existed some 600 years BC. But unfortunately, von Daniken, when introducing the concept of such an ancient helicopter, deliberately omitted the words, And I saw visions of God, found in verse 1. Visions are not to be taken as literal sights. The author here was dishonest enough to refuse to admit that the visions Ezekiel saw was of God. But von Daniken's main thrust of his argument was that the evolution of primates was deliberately tinkered with by the space travelers for Homo Sapiens to have evolved. In other words, evolution was given a boost to further human intelligence.

But von Daniken was not alone. Atheist author Arthur C. Clarke wrote in 1947 a short novel, The Sentinel. Where von Daniken's theories were propounded as science, Clarke made sure that his book was fiction. In it, about four million years ago, a group of primates saw a large black monolith appear suddenly overnight, in their midst. It was actually a highly complicated computer which not only analysed the primate's original intelligence, but also raised their intelligence to a degree that the primates were now able to use discarded bones as tools. The book was the basis of the 1968 award-winning movie by Stanley Kubrick, 2001 A Space Odyssey where here again, the evolution of primates into Homo Sapiens was given a massive boost. The only other difference to von Daniken's ideas was that where his gods arrived in spaceships which landed on Earth, Clarke's gods had long evolved out of their bodies and exist as pure energy. No spaceships were required.

Why have I gone into all this? Because as we shall see, we shall go back to it in the form of mainstream science as adhered to by Bryce and his ilk.

Now we shall look at on why organic evolution was impossible. No way could it have began in the first place.

I'm talking here about the evolution of a living cell, apparently a amoeba-like single cell organism floating in the primeval ocean. The amoeba today, has within its structure a long molecule known as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) which carries the genetic code which acts as a template for the production of protein within the cell, to maintain its life. Being a single cell, the amoeba has no chromosomes in the same way as humans have, but a genophore, in which the DNA, and as such, the genetic code, is stored. The DNA is a very long double helix, or a twisted ladder, the two side chains are of sugar-phosphates. These are held together by the "rungs" of the ladder, known as bases. There are four bases, the adenine (A), the cytosine (C), the guanine (G) and the thymine (T). A, on one side of the helix, always pairs with T on the other side, thus forming a rung on the ladder, while G always pairs with C, forming another rung. Thus each rung is better known as nucleotide bases, or simply base pairs. In the amoeba, there are 290 billion nucleotide or base pairs, each arranged in a specific order for the cell to live. In humans, there are about 2.9 billion base pairs in the nucleus of each cell.

The double helix of a DNA molecule

In the nucleus of a human cell, there are 46 chromosomes, 23 from each parent. Chromosome 1, for example, has 247,199,719 nucleotide base pairs, in which there are 4,220 genes. In the two sex chromosomes, the female X chromosome has 154,913,754 base pairs within are 1,846 genes. The male Y chromosome is much smaller, with just 57,741,652 base pairs, with just 454 genes. As such, in the nucleus of each cell of a female, there are 3,022,102,095 base pairs in the DNA molecule, with 31,731 active genes. In the male, there are 2,924,929,993 base pairs with 30,339 active genes in the nucleus of each cell.

The each base pairs must be arranged exactly right for the genes to function correctly. It looks to me that the genes are a far more complex version of a computer program, which have binary numeric digits as bases, a group of eight digits of "1" and "0" making a unit known as a byte. A long chain of ones and zeroes forms the code with which the computer functions properly. If there is an inconsistency in the arrangement of the binary code, the computer will crash. Likewise, if if the DNA base pairs are not arranged correctly, the cell will die.

So far, I have dealt only with the DNA, the genetic template of protein production in the cell. The whole cell is a vastly complicated structure. If I want to go on about the complexity of the cell, this would make this blog way too long. So I will post a general illustration of the function of the cell, with a brief run on its function, then go on to reason that no way evolution by chance could have ever taken place! Yet the central core of evolution by chance was taught for decades, if not centuries after Darwin's time.

Briefly, the genetic code in the DNA is copied on to the messenger RNA (or mRNA) with one of the bases - thymine -being replaced by another base, uracil. Where the DNA is a double helix, the mRNA is a single helix with a row of nucleotide bases. The genetic code is represented here in groups of three bases, known as codons. The mRNA then passes out of the nucleus of the cell, to be decoded by the ribosome. As the ribosome moves along the mRNA, this connects a chain of amino acids, the correct sequence of the amino acids being determined by the codon sequence of the mRNA. When the ribosome had completed the decoding of the mRNA, the chain of amino acid molecules fold up to become one unit of protein, also known as polypeptide. Up to 3,000 units of polypeptides are linked up to form a protein chain. Some of these polypeptide units are enzymes, which are responsible for chemical change in the body, for example, the pancreas producing the digestive enzymes lipase, protease and amylase.

Using the vastly complex cell as a yardstick, there is no way that evolution by chance could have ever taken place. For a demonstration, take the letters of the alphabet, say from a Scrabble board. There are 26 letters in the alphabet, each represented by at least one piece in the game. Take one of each letter, place in a bowl and mix thoroughly. Then carefully empty the bowl onto the floor, making a straight a line as you can. The chance of all 26 letters falling in perfect alphabetical order, including each the right side up and the right way round, is 1 in 26! - that is the factors making what is sometimes known as 26 Bang! It consists of 26 x 25 x 24 x 23 x 22 x 21 x 20... down to 2, which would give a result as one chance in 400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 that all the pieces would fall in a perfect alphabetical order on the first throw. If the letters represent the genes of a cell, they must all be in the correct sequence, or the cell cannot function and it will die. Yet the genetic code in the cell can produce a protein structure consisting of up to 3,000 proteins joined together in a long chain. In turn, as already mentioned in the paragraph above, each protein consists of up to 3,000 amino acid residues folded together into precise structures and arranged in proper sequence as directed by the genetic code. With the possibility of a single cell forming by chance, without intelligent design, by means of the protein chain alone would be 1 in 9,000,000 bang! - which would give a result which the entire age of the Universe would not be able to accommodate.

For example, mathematician Sir Fred Hoyle had calculated that the odds of producing just the basic enzymes by coincidence resulted in just one chance in one, with 40,000 zeros after it. By comparison, the chance of picking just one electron out of the entire Universe is one out of one with 80 zeros after it. If every electron in the Universe in itself becomes a Universe of its own, then the odds of picking out an electron out of all these Universes is one in one with 160 zeros after it. On this, Hoyle comments:

This situation is well known to geneticists and yet nobody seems to blow the whistle decisively on the theory...
Most scientists still cling to Darwinism because of its grip on the educational system...You either have to believe in the concepts, or...be branded a heretic.
Source: From an interview by AP Correspondent George W. Cornell, quoted from Times Advocate, Escondido, California, 1982. PP. A10-11.

The Universe simply can't wait for the cell to evolve, for its sheer mathematical impossibility. But there does look to be an evolutionary saviour - extraterrestrial origin. And this is taken seriously by evolutionary scientists.

One example from outer space origins is the meteorite which fell in Murchison, in Victoria, Australia in September 28th, 1969. Because of the location on which it fell, this rock became the Murchison Meteorite.

A fragment from the Murchison Meteorite

This rock contains some amino acid molecules, and it is now become the basic clue to the evolution of the cell, particularly the amoeba. Of course, evolutionists would rather see the whole group of living cells within the meteorite, but some amino acid molecules, which is the building blocks for protein, would have to do. Although there is still an unbridgeable gap between some amino acid molecules and a fully functional living cell, it lends to a very attractive theory that some living cells might have arrived on the primeval Earth billions of years ago. It is a bit like Erich von Daniken's theory of an invading race of space travelers, the only difference was that instead of spaceships, they hitched a ride on a passing meteorite instead! But such absurdity must evolutionists rely upon - otherwise the only alternative is Biblical Creation.

Erich von Daniken pushed as fact that what we call pseudoscience. It was rejected by every mainstream scientist. Could the idea of extraterrestial invasion of cells on an ancient meteorite also be false knowledge?

Erich von Daniken may not be that alone in the scientific world after all.