ONE HEARTBEAT AWAY -PART 16

                                             ONE HEARTBEAT              AWAY 

          PART 16


Mark Cahill's Book

A man once posed this question to me:  If you lined up a computer, a robot, a 747 Jet and a lowly worm, which one would a scientist say is the most intricately designed of those four?

I thought it would be the worm. He told me that I was right, and that is also what  scientists say. When you examine the function of a digestive system or  any least physical system, you begin to appreciate the highly ordered inner workings of that system.

We know for a fact that the computer had a creator and designer;  we know the robot had a creator and designer; we know the 747 had a creator and designer; but somehow we think the worm happened by luck and by chance over time?  That just doesn't make sense.

 If the inanimate objects needed a creator and a designer, not only would the complex, living, self- replicating worm have to have had a creator and designer, but it would have had to have had a much Greater Creator and Designer than those three inanimate objects.

 And if this is true
 even of the "simple" 
worm, imagine what 
it would take for
 something as amazingly
 complex  as the human brain to form.

Even Carl Sagan admits: 

The information content of the human brain expressed in bits is probably comparable to the total number of  connections among  neurons -  about a hundred trillion, 1014  bits. If written out in English, that information would fill some twenty million volumes - as many as the world's largest libraries. The equivalent of twenty million books is inside the head of every one of us. The brain is a very big place in a very small space ...  The neurochemistry of the brain is astonishingly busy, the circuitry of a machine more wonderful than any devised by humans. 

If humans cannot devise something as astonishing as the brain, Who can and Who did?

World- renowned crusader for Darwinism, Professor Richard Dawkins states:

We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully  "designed " to have come into existence by chance. 

Irreducible Complexity

Biochemist Dr. Michael Behe, who argues that evolution could never have given rise to the intricate structures of life , has identified something he calls "irreducible complexity."

This refers to an organism which is so complex that it could not have come together piece by piece and still function ; all the parts must have come about at once in order to have any function at all. Behe explains:

 By "irreducible complex" I mean a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function , wherein the removal  of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. 

An irreducibly complex system cannot be produced directly (that is, by continuously improving the initial function, which continues to work by the same mechanism ) by slight, successive modifications  of a precursor system, because any precursor to an irreducibly complex system that is missing a part is by definition nonfunctional....

Since natural selection can only choose systems that are already working, then if a biological system cannot be produced gradually it would have to arise as an integrated unit, in one fell swoop, for natural selection to have anything to act on. 


He cites the simple mousetrap as an example. All the pieces must be present at one time in order for it to function. A piece of wood won't catch mouse. A piece of wood and a spring won't catch a mouse. A piece of wood, a spring and a hinge won't catch a mouse. All the parts must be present, and arranged correctly, in order for the mousetrap to function. The same would be true for any irreducibly complex system.

For instance, the knee     joint consists of at least 16 essential             characteristics, each       requiring thousands of pieces of information to
exist simultaneously in the genetic code . Therefore, the knee could not have evolved gradually but must have been created all at once as a whole fully functioning joint.


Amazingly Charles Darwin himself admitted that an idea such as "irreducible complexity,"  if proven true, would demolish his theory.  In The Origin OF Species he wrote:

If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications , my theory would absolutely break down. 

Darwin, as quoted in the beginning of this chapter, said he had a most difficult time  with the human eye. He admitted that it would be  "absurd in the highest degree"  to claim that the eye with all its amazing complexity, could have evolved.

Next post tomorrow  9th August