Creation Matters page 2
Without Excuse! Article 8. See Page 5 “The Testimony of the PNAS.” The National Academy of the Sciences is an elite society of scientists in the United States. Membership is by invitation only and offered to just a few scientists in each field,representing those who have made significant contributions to their fields. The society publishes a journal called the Proceedings of the NAS. It is one of the most prestigious journals in the US. I was surprised to come across an article in it which offered a long list of problems which would make a natural origin of life “implausible.” It then proposed a solution to the problems: life must have started on mineral surfaces. This solution is laughable. Mineral surfaces do not overcome the problems that they themselves listed. Furthermore, they only add to the difficulties of getting to the first cell, they do not help. This topic is also discussed in yet more detail in Without Excuse! Articles 23 and 27
Without Excuse! Article 9. See Page 2. “The Testimony of an O-
Without Excuse! Article 10. See Page 6. “The Testimony of Succinate Dehydrogenase.” Succinate Dehydrogenase (SD) is an enzyme found in every living cell that uses oxygen in its metabolism. SD is extremely complex, being made from over 1,100 amino acids strung together. It is effectively impossible for random processes to produce a molecule this complicated in a single step by random processes. Yet, it is unrealistic to expect non-
Without Excuse! Article 11. See Page 4. “The Testimony of Darwin’s Imaginary Evidence.” By the time Darwin wrote his famous book, The Origin of Species, he had become a “true believer” in evolution. Darwin states some aspect of evolution. He then shows the evidence in support of his position. He then admits the evidence doesn’t really support it, so he invents a reason for the inconsistency. He then considers his imagined evidence to be more valid than the observed evidence. In the case of the eye, he admits he can’t even imagine how evolutionary processes could develop it. However, he says that his reason tells him that he should be able to imagine it, that the problem is his limited understanding not the theory. So, in this case he has been reduced to relying on “imagined imaginary evidence” to support his theory. Not discussed in the article is the sad observation that scientists today follow his example. They have so convinced themselves that evolution is true that no amount of evidence would convince them to change their minds. The quantity, significance, and consistency of the evidence is irrelevant to them.
Without Excuse! Article 12. See Page 6. “The Testimony of the Details.” Evolutionary theory can appear to make sense when presented at a higher, overview level. The problems are in the details. An illustration of this is given in Miller’s experiment. Almost every introductory biology textbook as well as encyclopedia article on the origin of life discusses this experiment. It reputedly shows how natural processes can make amino acids that would be useful as building blocks for proteins. However, if one looks at the details of the experiment, he finds that in truth the experiment reveals many problems, any one of which could effectively prevent a natural origin of life.
Without Excuse! Article 13. See Page 4. “The Testimony of False Assumptions.” I once offered an early version of our pamphlet to a professor of evolutionary biology. (This was at the major campus in Central Michigan). We had an intense conversation.He assumed evolution was true. He then proceeded to deny any evidence which contradicted it, regardless of its strength. For instance, SD (see article 9 above) would not appear naturally in over a Googol years (a Googol is 10 with 100 zeroes after it.) As we worked our way through the basis for this claim, he admitted that the calculation appeared to be correct. So, rather than admit that this created a problem for a natural origin of life, he proposed an infinite amount of time in an infinite number of independent, parallel, universes. We happened to be in the one that was successful. Somehow, it seemed that he was no longer functioning as a scientist. Totally imaginary, unsupported evidence was more valid to him than observed evidence, at least when the evidence challenged the validity of his evolutionary assumptions. (He was following Darwin’s example discussed in Article 11 above; today, Darwin is still being copied in this. todaymmonly practiced today).
Without Excuse! Article 7. See Page 4 “The Testimony of Chemical Equilibrium.” Would you willingly flip a coin with someone and pay him a dollar if you lost and have him pay you only a penny if you won? No matter how much money you might start with, you would eventually go broke. Yet, these are the odds at each step facing the assembly of long chains of molecules required for life. In order to believe in a natural origin of life, a person needs to throw away the laws of chemical equilibrium and the laws of statistics. This is a big deal for someone who understands these laws.