Lets talk about creationism versus the theory of evolution in regard to the various disciplines of science. We have already spoken of the astronomical side of this question. We will now consider the study of cells. These cells make up every living thing. What evidence is there in this area, which will settle the question of evolutionism versus creationism? If the theory of evolution is correct, then the accidental synthesis of the DNA molecule had to have taken place. As biological science learns more and more about the complexity of the cellular structure, the realization that this feat is impossible has set in. The DNA molecule can only be replicated in the presence of certain enzymes; numerous, complicated enzymes. Those enzymes themselves can only be replicated in the presence of DNA molecules. So, which came first, the chicken or the egg?
It is not enough to `simply` synthesize the DNA molecule; it would also have been necessary to synthesize these attendant enzymes, virtually at the same time. This is mathematically improbable, to say the least. As we learn more and more about single cells, we have learned that each cell is composed of thousands of functioning enzymes. In the early days of science, cells were thought to be simple creations, with only a few components. Thus their accidental `evolution` was perhaps a bit more plausible. With the advent of the electron microscope, science has learned that even singular cells are enormously complicated structures. The advance of science almost daily erodes the already shaky foundation of the theory of evolution.
A single cell contains over 1,000 functioning enzymes. Each enzyme requires a gene to produce it. Each gene might be made up of 1,000 or more nucliatides [sp]. Each nucliatide [sp] occurs with the arrangement of four particular molecules that form it; thus, there could be 4^1000 possible combinations of these nucliatides [sp] to form only ONE of these genes. In other words, for the probability that the proper sequence for the formation of ONE nucliatide occurred is 4^1000, which is the same as 10^600. Having spoken of exponential numbers before, it is still difficult to assimilate 10^600. To refresh your memory, remember that there are only 10^80 electrons in the universe.
Remember that the above odds are for the chance synthesis of ONE GENE. Also remember that these alleged `evolutionary processes` must link together to eventually form ONE living cell. The exponents of the numbers allegedly attributed to these processes quite quickly reaches the laughable. With each assumed `evolutionary process`, the chances begin to approach zero very quickly. Thus, the theory of evolution is in trouble at the very lowest levels. That is, there is mathematical evidence that the theory of evolution doesn’t even have the possibility of `getting off the ground`. The theory of evolution cannot even demonstrate the chance synthesis of a single living cell. But remember, the evolutionist MUST find a way to explain these things. To NOT do so would be `against his religion`. Since the evolutionist `knows` that there is no Creator, his ONLY alternative is the theory of evolution, no matter how ludicrous his theories and `explanations` become.
Primordial Soup
The evolutionists have devised the postulation that, billions of years ago, the earth had a sea of rich nutrients. In one of many biological miracles, lightning struck this `primordial soup` and, by chance, these nutrients reacted and produced the first living, self-replicating cell. This cell was the first living thing in the universe, according to the evolutionist. The evolutionist conjectures and implies that this jump was just a minor thing. That is far from the case, as we saw a few minutes ago when we discussed the odds of even one cell being `born` by chance.
Alien Mothership by VampireDGhost
Concerning that `jump` from molecule to living cell, a Nobel Peace Prize winner has deduced that an alien entity, in the dim past, `seeded` the many forms of life on earth. Isn’t it incredible that a mind brilliant enough to win the Nobel Prize could come up with such a stupid idea?
This theory, more than anything else, shows the utter failure of the theory of evolution to explain the origin of life on earth. This great scientist is basically saying, after realizing that the theory of evolution is foolishness, since life couldn’t have started on earth, it must have started somewhere else. Apparently evolutionists are getting more desperate than ever for an explanation of the origin of life. At least this statement raises the odds. Maybe, just maybe, somewhere out there in space, there is a planet where the biological miracles of the evolutionist could have happened. At least this puts things out in space where there is no one around to be able to prove their facetious theories wrong.
Pacific Ocean From Space by blueforce4116
Earth, with all of its water, with its atmosphere, with its perfect distance from the sun, with the perfect cant of the axis so that we have seasonal changes, with the perfect amount of light, with all of this perfection, if it is impossible for it to have occurred here, how could it have occurred somewhere else? There seems to be a certain method of thinking, bound into the minds of certain scientists, to proclaim that it HAS to have happened, and whatever kind of frenzied thought is necessary to produce the right circumstances, we MUST devise and proclaim it. There are apparently no limit to the imaginations of those devising these theories. There also seems to be no limit as to the gullibility of the public in accepting these silly theories.
For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.†Where is the wise person? Where is the teacher of the law? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 1 Corinthians 1:19-20: 19
Source
The Theory of Evolution: This lecture composed by Dr. L., D.D.S (Freeware)
Reading Sources: First moon walk disproved evolutionary theory | Where’s the proof for evolution? | Darwin himself said there was no proof! | Can Evolution Produce an Eye? | There are NO Fossils to Show Even One Animal Turning into Another! | Is Evolution a Theory, Fact or Law? Or None of the Above? | There’s a Law Against Evolution–It’s Called the Second Law of Thermodynamics! | Evolutionists Say Mutations are Good–are They? | What About the Human “Tail�
