The inherent error in abiogenesis and macro-evolution . . . a fly in the ointment of Truth

 

The inherent error in abiogenesis and macro-evolution . . . a fly in the ointment of Truth

Since 1974 I have debated this issue. I have published articles, books and debated it online and person to person. What is always evident is this -- it always comes down to an exercise of faith, a basic decision of one simply choosing to believe in evolution despite any solid evidence against it. It is its own brand of religion. It is not science in the truest since of the term.

I will now share just a few things I have recently posted, debating this issue in the comments of a YouTube video mocking the videos of a well-known Creationist. First off -- I am NOT a Young Earth Creationist. I used to be one for several years back in the 70s but my continual research into the subject lead me to change my views. I am now an Old Earth, Old Universe Creationist. I am more easily pigeon-holed as a believer in The Gap Theory -- a view that a vast period of time exists between Genesis verse 1 and verse 2.

Okay, back to some of my recent comments on YouTube . . .

I was offered a question and I answered . . .

QUESTION: Also why do you deny the possibility that God planned this all from the very very start? He could of caused the big bang knowing earth would form a habitable area, and knew the chemistry would get us here? A omnipotent God would have no problem setting up these conditions.

The answer is simple. Man evolving from some chemical-based goo on a rock is NOT the oral traditions and written records we have been given about our genesis. Man was specially formed from the dust of the ground, molded into a special entity that God Himself actually breathed His special life and nature into. No other life form was brought into existence in this fashion. The scriptures indicate Man was created in the image of God Himself, the Elohim in Hebrew language. Man is a triune being composed of flesh, soul and spirit. No other life form on Earth is like us. Simple chemistry does not give rise to a soul and a spirit. These are unique characteristics, impossible to arise by godless evolutionary means.

God put eternity in us -- that hunger, that feeling we are from beyond, that reason we are driven to discover our place in this universe. We each instinctively know there is more to us than mere chemistry. We paint images, we grow flowers, we sing, we compose music that transcends anything like survival of the fittest ever brought about. We dream, we love, we know we are more than random fluctuations in the spacetime continuum. Like I stated earlier, Creation was for a special purpose and Mankind was destined for an even more fascinating purpose, (beyond explanation here), and the Omnipotent God has no need for a gradual process of Mankind "arising".

We did not come into being from various forms of hominoids shuffling out of Africa. In fact the bones of evidence for our supposed evolutionary roots would barely cover the tops of 2 or 3 pool tables! And from that pile we have concluded erroneously that from these various forms of hominoid fossils we have proof that we evolved from them. It is pure rubbish. Just like the Burgess Shale Cambrian explosion of life forms from 545 million years ago -- modern man, Homo sapiens sapiens, suddenly appeared on this planet -- by the very finger of God.

 

AND HERE ARE OTHER COMMENTS:

 

 Evolutionism or creationism both require obvious levels of faithing the details along. Call that religion if you want. I don't do religion. It is a man-made construct -- even now like a corporate business. The bible is idolized as if it is a sacred idol. I follow Spirit. I do not attend any church nor subscribe to any organized religion as they are ALL wrong. You can say I have a religious belief that supersedes my interest in how the Universe works -- but you are in 100% error saying so. I am not anti-intellectualism at all -- I just don't buy the one-sided, close-mindedness of many so-called intellectuals' opinion on origins. I have been deeply involved in the sciences for over 27 years professionally being paid to do that gig. I need not trot out my papers and discoveries. I also was a science teacher in a private high school. I have been a science "nerd" since a child. So you saying I am not interested in science is a flat-out joke. Again -- evolution is a type of religion -- and it is "bad" in that it thinks it is not. Religion is just bad because it thinks it knows everything about God and many times spouts out really, really bad ideas like Young-Earth Creationism promulgated and hailed as God's truth by folks like Ken Ham -- which is an embarrassment for other Creationists not ascribing to such fairy tales. Yeah, I know I said I was done with this discussion but when commenters get things so wrong like you -- I have to erase the goofball chalkboard and add the correction formula.

 

 AND HERE ARE OTHER COMMENTS:

 

 "It took approximately 4.5 billion years for a series of evolutionary transitions resulting in intelligent life to unfold on Earth. In another billion years, the increasing luminosity of the Sun will make Earth uninhabitable for complex life. Intelligence therefore emerged late in Earth's lifetime. Together with the dispersed timing of key evolutionary transitions and plausible priors, one can conclude that the expected transition times likely exceed the lifetime of Earth, perhaps by many orders of magnitude. In turn, this suggests that intelligent life is likely to be exceptionally rare. Arriving at an alternative conclusion would require either exceptionally conservative priors, finding additional instances of evolutionary transitions, or adopting an alternative model that can explain why evolutionary transitions took so long on Earth without appealing to rare stochastic occurrences. The model provides a number of other testable predictions, including that M dwarf stars are uninhabitable, that many biological paradoxes will remain unsolved without allowing for extremely unlikely events, and that, counterintuitively, we might be slightly more likely to find simple life on Mars." ~ quote from a recent article/paper published (Full interesting article here: https://doi.org/10.1089/ast.2019.2149 )

My take on the article:

It required tons upon tons of repeated incidences of luck upon luck for life to have arose on the Earth and to have then subsequently survived the hostile ancient world as envisioned. It is patently obvious to me that abiogenesis is simply not plausible and the existence of life on this planet was not a biochemical accident that then mutated and mutated favorably over eons to bring about all the diversity of life forms this planet has seen. 

What is evident  — when one is rational about things — is that the “Goldilocks Zone” our planet is situated within as well as the very presence of complex life thereupon screams out as clear evidence of DESIGN, a creative intelligence working and the conditions then being provided over time to allow life to even exist in this vast, cold and hazardous universe. We are very, very likely alone as intelligent life forms in the universe — yet not alone as beings that are part of an ancient plan. Unsettling isn’t it.

 

 AND HERE ARE OTHER COMMENTS:

 

 I have not only studied mitochondrial structures but also cardiomyocytes, lung cells, skeletal muscle, fibroblasts, collagen, vascular tissue and in my college days I studied various plant cells too. What I witnessed not only on the micro level but also on the macro level is a continuity of design, purpose and function. There is also an innate beauty in it all, the patterns in skeletal muscle and even a fiddle head fern. When I was a surveyor for some years I saw amazing patterns in nature or even geological patterns, fossil imprints on shale in Nova Scotia. It’s hard to explain but there’s an obvious structural design in so many living things and even inorganic things. I look at a rebar in a Lowes supply store and I remember how fibroblasts created organic “rebar” forming collagen in the interstitial matrix of lung alveolar structures. What naturally occurring non-design function taught a fibroblast to build reinforcing material so lungs could properly inhale and exhale and pop back into shape? That didn’t just happen by chance!! Men DESIGN rebar for a purpose and the Creator DESIGNED fibroblasts to make organic “rebar” for structural integrity in organs that needed such. And yes — there is mutation and things do die because of it. But evolution begs for mutations - ergo beneficial changes to get a different organism in the long run of many, many, many “good” mutations. The Creator allowed for and planned for mutations — even as part of a long range plan. Why? I am not really sure. I believe mutations are related to designed obsolescence in living things aka death.

 

 The main issue in accepting Intelligent Design which irks many people is this -- if God created all things, then there follows logically that He is in control of all things. And then there is now the issue of the very real possibility that Mankind is naked before Him and ultimately under His rule. Meaning this -- there is very likely a moral code, laws governing our lives and an inherent responsibility before Him. These principles are ancient and men everywhere have long held the idea of a Creation and a Creator. From these foundational beliefs have arisen many, many types of faith, religious ideals, so to speak -- over countless millennia. Yet now, very recently the new religious sciences of abiogenesis, macro evolution and the godless universe popping into existence -- somehow -- have arisen. This new science of origins pitches a Creator into the dust bin outside of the lab. With no Creator -- there are no ultimate moral codes except those agreed upon by various legislative bodies of government. Everything now is merely situational morality, morphing year to year. There are no absolutes regarding Man's morality in this brand new godless world of macro evolution. As far as the evolutionary disciplines' degree'd disciples -- they ARE wrong, many are mislead due to extreme bias in universities, the professors, journals, books and their peers. They are not lying to us -- because they have each drunk the kool-aid long ago and actually believe what they say. There are many scientists however who began in their research believing the falsehoods but they spit the kool-aid out soon enough and are now avid Creationists and adherents to Intelligent Design. Now some evolutionary scientists also believe in a distant God out there and attend the churches of their choice. They believe He got the ball rolling and then let probability happen and here we all are. Others believe similarly but feel at some time point in man's past -- maybe during the era of Homo sapiens neanderthalensis -- God looked down and thought, "Hmm, let's tap this fellow on his sagittal crest and give him a soul and spirit." That is the jist of what is called Theisitic evolution. Both of these ideas are simply bogus to me.

 

The verse (Colossians 1:16) and its context indicate that Jesus, the Son of God, was the primary agent of the creation of the universe, ex nihilo, (out of nothing) matter, energy and living things -- all were designed by Him. They were designed with a purpose. It was not a random event in Time. Time itself was also a created thing, within which special events occur. And the phrase referring to -- by Him all things "consist" -- literally means the very smallest building blocks of matter and energy are held together by Him. He is not some distant, apathetic deity -- Creation is His beloved living entity, intelligently designed with an endpoint and a culmination within a Plan.

 

 

 AND HERE is one final COMMENT:

 

If everything about or existence is mere random chance, including our planet, our solar system and the entire universe -- then explain this . . .

Why is our moon just the right size, just the correct distance from us -- so that during a solar eclipse, the moon exactly covers the diameter of a star 92.95 million miles, (averaged), away to create a lunar eclipse? What are the odds if that being random chance?

It is a signature of the Creator who designed it to be that way -- maybe for the open-minded to recognize his handiwork.