ONE HEARTBEAT AWAY - PART 15

 ONE HEARTBEAT       AWAY

  part 15

 
(Mark Cahill's Book)

Dr Colin Patterson, director  of the British Museum of Natural History, and highly respected evolutionist, wrote a book about evolution. When asked why his book didn't include any illustrations of  transitional fossils, Dr Patterson who has seven million in his museum replied: 

I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any,  fossils or living , I certainly would have included it....  I will lay it on the line. There is not one such fossil for which one might make a watertight argument.


 Niles Eldridge, a leading expert in vertebrate fossils, decided to honestly weigh the evidence. Here is his conclusion:

No wonder paleontologists shied away from evolution for so long. It never seems to happen. Assiduous collecting up cliff faces yield zigzags, minor oscillations, and very  occasional slight accumulation of change - over millions of years, at a rate too slow  to account for all the prodigious change that has occurred in evolutionary history. When we do see the introduction of evolutionary novelty, it usually shows up with a bang, and often with no firm evidence that the fossils did not evolve elsewhere!  Evolution cannot forever be going on somewhere else. Yet that's how the fossil record has struck many a forlorn paleontologist looking to learn something about evolution.


Wow! What a couple of statements:
they just said there is no evidence to back up the theory of evolution.

 So after doing a bit of research to discover the truth,  "I did learn something about evolution."

I learned that the evidence just isn't there to put my faith in. How about you?

Probability

As we have already seen,
 the Law of Biogenesis 
proves that evolution is not possible. And the complete lack of fossil evidence supports  that conclusion.

Another fact that led me to reject evolution was the Law of Probability, which also shows the impossibility of life rising from non-life.

According to the Distinguished  British astronomer Sir Frederick Hoyle, the number of trial assemblies of amino acids needed to give rise to the enzymes required for life , and their discovery from random shuffling, turns out to be less than 1 in 1 x 1040 000,  Just to give you an idea how astronomical this number is one trillion is only 1012. And it is estimated that there are only 
1080  electrons in the entire universe! So, 1040 000 of anything is almost impossible even to imagine.

Mathematicians say that any event in which the chances are beyond one in 1050  is impossible - it is an event that we can state with certainty will never happen, no matter how much time is allotted and no matter how many conceivable opportunities could exist for the event to take place.

Recall that Hoyle said the probability of an enzyme arising spontaneously was less than one in 1040 000  - which is an incredibly lesser probability than the one in 1050 that makes an event impossible. 

Dr Harold Morowitz, former professor of biophysics at Yale University, estimated that the probability for the chance formation of the smallest, simplest form of a living organism  known is one chance in 10340 000 000.

And the famous astronomer
 and evolutionist,Carl Sagan, estimated that the chance of  life evolving on any single
 planet, including Earth, is one chance
 in 102 000 000 000 .

Do you realize how huge that number is?  It would take 6000 books with 300 pages each just to write this number out. So if ever anything were impossible, spontaneous generation would have to be it. 

According to the Law of Probability then, the odds of life rising from non-life are far beyond the realm of possibility. And that is just for a single molecule to come to life. How would you explain the complexity of life forms, or the formation of the extremely detailed DNA  code?

Human DNA, for example contains three billion pieces of information - literally tens of thousands of pages worth. Did that information develop and evolve one page at a time?

How could random undirected,  random chance have created complex information such as this? 
It boggles the mind to think about it. It certainly does not indicate chance, but rather design.  

next post   7th August