Mohamed Amin (Group B)

Study skills assignment

18/04/2012

Theory of evolution V Probability

In this essay, I'd like to confront what really has been proven around evolutionism and what the findings really demonstrate. I appeal only to probability, philosophical evidence, scientific studies and analyzes that are controllable. In my opinion evolutionary science is subjective, unproven assumptions and operates from enriched finds, retrieves facts from the context and ranks on manipulative manner. Let's look back at how it all began. In summary, according to the theory of evolution, life started a few billion years ago in a lifeless chaos. By coincidence the right molecules collided together and became increasingly longer and more complicated molecules. This went on until there was a molecule that could reproduce themselves and formed a living creature. You must realize that evolutionist claim that the longer something exists; the greater the chance is that it develops itself naturally to a higher level! However, this goes completely against the laws of thermodynamics. And the more we have come to understand about the chemical processes in living cells, the more we find out that life may not arise from coincidence. Life is an unprecedented complex system! Some philosophers such as Bertrand Russell argued that the universe is eternal, meaning it has no beginning and it will never end. However if we think about this we will conclude that this position is irrational. If the universe never had a beginning it means there must be an infinite history of past events. Yet does an actual infinite exist in the real world? Is it possible? The concept of the actual infinite cannot be exported into the real world, because it leads to contradictions and doesnt make sense. Lets take the following examples to illustrate this point: Say you have an infinite number of balls, if I take 2 balls away, how many do you have left? Infinity. Does that make sense? Well, there should be two less than infinity, and if there is, then we should be able to count how many balls you have. But this is impossible, because the infinite is just an idea and doesnt exist in the real world. In light of this fact the famous German mathematician David Hilbert said, According David Hilbert. On the Infinite, in Philosophy of Mathematics, ed. with an Intro. by P. Benacerraf and H. Putnam. Prentice-Hall. 1964, page151. Stated; The infinite is nowhere to be found in reality. It neither exists in nature nor provides a legitimate basis for rational thoughtthe role that remains for the infinite to play is solely that of an idea.

Mohamed Amin (Group B)

Study skills assignment

18/04/2012

Take the distance between two points, one may argue that you can subdivide the distance into infinite parts, but you will always be subdividing and never actually reach the infinitieth part! So in reality the infinite is potential and can never be actualised. Similarly the ancient Greek Philosopher Aristotle explained, Aristotle, Physics 207b8 (available online here http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.html) quoted; the infinite is potential, never actual: the number of parts that can be taken always surpasses any assigned number. So if we refer back to an infinite history of past events we can conclude, since events are not just ideas they are real, the number of past events cannot be infinite. Therefore the universe must be finite, in other words the cosmos had a beginning. In Darwin's era one could believe in evolution because they didnt know about the complexity of a living cell. Ernst Haeckel, a prominent evolutionist at the time, claimed that a cell is a "simple nugget of a protein combination carbon. Today we know better. That living cell is irreducible intricately designed. We can use another scientific branch, namely mathematical probability; to calculate how likely it is that a living cell was created from nothing. We're going to face the following impossible situation: A molecule that once in the primordial sea has been formed never goes to pieces. All necessary materials for construction are located within easy reach of the molecule.

(Note that these two assumptions sin against the laws of thermodynamics!) However, protein molecules are composed of up to 20 different amino acids. The protein molecules have a coding system that is built up of (hundreds of) these 20 amino acids, similar to such as this text is encrypted by means of the 26 letters of our alphabet. All these amino acids work flawlessly and collated together. Suppose that a simple protein molecule of 100 amino acids emerges, then the chance that such a molecule according to a certain pattern arises so a chance of 1 on 20 100. In other words, the chance is 1: 10 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 million (130 zeros!). The chance that a simple protein with a hundred amino acids naturally arises (and that's what evolutionism claims), thus 1 is a number with 130 zeros. These kind of

Mohamed Amin (Group B)

Study skills assignment

18/04/2012

numbers are so large that we cannot comprehend but a comparison can give an idea how huge this number is. The entire universe, so including all galaxies, stars and planets together, is composed of atoms. All atoms contain approximately 10 80 electrons together. According to evolutionists the universe is up to 30 billion years old and that is 1018 seconds. Now when all the electrons in the universe 30 billion years long react a billion times every second, there would be in all those 30 billion years a total of 1080 x 1018 x 109 = 10107 reactions have taken place. The reaction is still smaller than the mega large number which we just have discussed. The chance of occurrence of a simple protein is impossible. The chance is 1: 1 with thirty zeros, an incomprehensible chance. This calculation is difficult to understand, but it shows that it is completely impossible that even a small 'living molecule' would arise by chance. And then you realize that even the simplest living creature that we know, a Micrococcus, yet highly complex and made from 200,000 molecules! Just a simple flagellum of a bacterium consists of 200 different types of proteins that all work together flawlessly. A flagellum is so incomprehensible complex and uniquely designed, that there never was a scientist who has ever tried to describe how this might have evolved! And let alone a cell from the human liver that contains over 53 billion complex protein molecules! On the basis of scientific analysis, one cant argue that the emergence of life is so indescribable and incomprehensible complex that it never could have been accidental. But we are not there yet. Even though there were thousands of complexes protein molecules in a cell present and by chance enough genetic material, then still nothing is going happen! The amino acids in a protein must be placed in a very systematic order, like the letters in a book. If the structure of letters in a book is wrong, then it is unreadable and unusable causing the fui??g 9dsj hFewf30N0 ((jdd. (I hope you understand what I mean!) In other words, without the perfectly thought-out structure and sequence the unordered amino acids in a protein, the system cannot work. And the orders of the amino acids are pre-programmed in the DNA! Without this information, a cell may not work. Scientist have estimated that the genetic material in a living cell contains the same information as 2000 books with 600 pages with 500 words per page (3 billion letters).That's about as much as 600 medical dictionaries. The probability that a cell naturally arises is as small as 600 times when a monkey completely types the medical dictionary without errors. The chance is as great as when you throw thousands of letterboxes out of a tower with a total of 3 billion loose alphabet letters, once it reaches the ground, a Shakespeare play is formed. The American professor and biochemist Michael Behe wrote: "the idea of Darwinian molecular evolution has no scientific basis. The scientific literature magazines or books contain no publication that describes how molecular evolution of real,

Mohamed Amin (Group B)

Study skills assignment

18/04/2012

complex biochemical systems but also occurred or could take place. There were reports that such an evolution has taken place, but these claims are never substantiated with relevant experiments or calculations. Given the absence of an authority on which to base claims to knowledge, you can rightfully say that Darwinian molecular evolution is an empty notion. " (Michael Behe, Intelligent Design Theory as a tool for analyzing biochemical systems.) And then we just argued about well-functioning biochemical systems. Think also about the systems in organisms are like the echolocation system of dolphins and bats, the complex jump mechanism of a grasshopper, our complex digestive system etc. Or think of our hands and fingers, which in every detail perfectly constructed to seize, detain, to cooperate Or think about your eyes: they absorb light, which is projected through your brains and be converted into images - images that threedimensional because you have two eyes! Charles Darwin wrote in The Origin of Species the following: To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. " However, you also wonder about the exterior design of animals like zebra, penguin, peacock, etc. All of this has a compelling need of a design, and therefore, a designer. No design without a designer. That's not a dogmatic religion, but a purely scientific fact. Nothing on earth was designed without a designer.

Mohamed Amin (Group B)

Study skills assignment

18/04/2012

Bibliography

Michael Behe :http://www.conservapedia.com/Irreducible_complexity Evolution, Thermodynamics, and Entropy, Henry Morris, Ph.D. I have enough faith to be an atheist, Norman L. Geisler and Turek, Frank (Ark Books, 2006) Modern Science in Bible, Hobrink biologist, Dr Ben A Few Reasons an Evolutionary Origin of Life Is Impossible, Duane Gish, Ph.D. Derek Parfit, Why Anything? Why This? London Review of Books 20/2 (January 22, 1998), page 24. David Hilbert. On the Infinite, in Philosophy of Mathematics, ed. with an Intro. by P. Benacerraf and H. Putnam. Prentice-Hall. 1964, page151. Aristotle, Physics 207b8 (available online here http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.html)