Creation Truth Outreach, Inc.  Pamphlet

Next File
HOME
Pamphlet Front Page

Previous File
© 2007  Creation Truth Outreach, Inc. All Rights Reserved.   This pamphlet may be freely copied provided it is copied in its entirety, its
contents are not altered in any manner, and additional or tighter copyright restrictions than these are not imposed on it.  
Revised May 5, 2008
Chapter 5. Conclusion: Science Teaches Normal Chemical Processes Do Not Favor A
Natural Origin of Life.

We have just seen a list of many, many ways in which the normal chemical processes of nature
work against a purely natural origin of life. The list is by no means complete, many other items
could be added to it and more are being discovered on a regular basis. So, it becomes conclusive
that normal chemical processes work against a natural formation of life instead of favoring it.
Furthermore, long periods of time would not help. More time would just mean more tar.  

At a certain point we need to say enough is enough.  Almost anywhere one looks, if he is honest he
can find issues that demonstrate how natural processes work against a natural formation of life. In
effect these issues show that it would be impossible for life to form without a Creator God
intervening into the normal affairs of His creation.  If natural processes are inadequate, then
supernatural processes are required. After a while and with the accumulation of issue after issue,
the situation becomes more of a person’s willingness to acknowledge the evidence than the amount
of evidence available.

I find it intriguing and grievesome to observe how an evolutionist will reject all manner of scientific
observation that goes against his beliefs.  He justifies this on the expectation that new experiments
and discoveries in the future will somehow explain away all of the problems.  Then, he accuses
creationists who take the results of the observation at face value as unscientific and he, the one
who is holding on to a belief which is contradicted by the observed evidence, as the one who is
scientific.  Somehow, things seem backwards here.

Table Of Contents