Will they ever give up?

In an article in Business Insider SA, ‘Why Namibia is the perfect place to search for alien life on earth,’ 1 Sarah Wild writes: 

  • ‘…scientists all over the world are hunting for present or past life on Mars, and other planets.’ 
  • ‘Many are looking to extreme environments, such as Namibia’s Namib desert, to see what sort of pressures life can handle.’ 
  • ‘Hypoliths, communities of blue-green bacteria found underneath quartz rocks, could hold the secret to life on other planets….’ 1

Chris McKay, a senior scientist at Nasa’s Ames Exploration Centre in California, is interested in deserts for the same reason.  ‘For life, there must be an organism at the base of the food chain, a primary producer.  These blue green smudges on the undersides of rocks in hyper-arid deserts are one of those primary producers….’ 1

#  The facts are: 

  • The Bible is clear that God created the primary producers of life on earth on day 3.  “Then God said, ‘Let the land produce vegetation: seed bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.’”  It includes the hypoliths. 
  • Till now there has been no evidence that life could have evolved on earth.  It is a terrible show stopper for those who believe in Darwinian evolution.  The claim is that life evolved, but there is no beginning of this evolved life on earth.  There is absolutely no evidence that life began naturally, except if one uses the words, ‘could have, might have, should have’ to replace testable, repeatable science. 
  • The blue-green bacteria that they put their hope on photosynthesise.  That is such a complex chemical reaction that it can never evolve naturally.  Besides, why would it evolve in the desert?  If one thinks logically, why would bears evolve to live in the Polar regions, or penguins to live in hostile Arctic regions? 

#  The questions are:

  • What scientific advantages are there for society on earth if they would find life on Mars?  Answer: none. 
  • Why is it important to find life on other planets?  Answer: it would disprove Genesis 1 and show that life did not need a Creator.  
  • Why must Genesis 1 be disproved?  Answer: it will be a ‘safeguard’ against the Bible’s message that God created man on earth for a purpose (to choose his eternal destination).  And that a person will give an account to God for what he or she did while alive. 
  • Will they find life on other planets (the ‘project’ to find life on other planets is so important to the devil, the ruler of this world, that billions are spent on it)?  Answer: No!  God is very clear.  He created the earth and life on it with a purpose.  There is no mention of life on either Mars or any other planet. 
  • Will they ever stop looking for life on other planets?  Answer:  No!  As long as the Bible and God are around, they must give people the hope that there is life on other planets.  That will prove that God is dispensible.  So they can live as they please without consequences. 

Conclusion 

  • There is no evidence at all that life on earth evolved.  So why would it evolve on other planets? 
  • The best recourse for believers in Jesus is to put our hope in God who will one day renew this planet and give us an out of this world experience on His new dwelling.  

Reference

  1. Sarah Wild, Why Namibia is the perfect place to search for alien life on earth, Business Insider SA

Do you fear the verdict, ‘science denier!’

Many people in the Christian community fear the words, ‘Evolution is science.  If you deny evolution, you deny science.  If you doubt evolution, you destroy Western Civilisation and progress.  You want people back in the Dark Ages.’

This slogan is designed to silence criticism of Darwinian evolution.  However, one should be careful to distinguish between science and the other so-called ‘science.’

#  God mandated science 

  • When God created Adam and Eve, He told them to ‘rule’ over the animal kingdom. 1  In Genesis 1:28 He said, ‘…fill the earth and subdue it.  Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground.’  We see the command to rule and subdue as the ‘science mandate.’  Man is to investigate nature and learn how it works.  Then he can apply laws of nature in practical applications.
  • Operational science depends on observations or experiments that can be repeatedly observed and measured.  An example is the flight of birds.  Scientists study it with repeated experiments and observations.  Then they formulate flight principles and apply them in practice, like air planes.  Operational science has brought immense benefits to society, like electric motors, medicines, improved crop growing, communications, electricity, et cetera.

#  Ruler of this world mandated ‘science’  

  • There is no mandate from God to study origins.  He told us in Genesis 1 and other passages that He created it all in six days.  Origin investigations has its origin in the mind of the ruler of this world.  It is rebellion against God’s Word.  As God’s sworn enemy, he opposes the Scripture in every way he can.
  • The past cannot be tested by repeated experiments.  It is called ‘forensic science.’ Forensic science refers to the way detectives reconstruct crime scenes.  They look for clues, motives, et cetera.  Criminal investigations need forensic science, but the devil imposes the ‘necessity’ of origins investigations on society.
  • Origins or evolutionary ‘science’ is a useless endeavour.  It has never led to practical applications.  No Nobel prize has ever been awarded for it.  It only benefits the devil.  People who believe in evolution usually reject the Bible, and this leads to loss of eternal life with God.

Summary

  • Operational science is mandated by God and benefits society.
  • Origins science is promoted by the ruler of this world, and benefits hell.
  • The devil’s creation lies eventually lead people to discard the Bible.

Conclusion

No one has been able to prove scientifically that evolution is true.  Sinful man, influenced by the devil, invests billions to try to convince people that the universe and life on earth evolved.  One of the effective ways to silence critics (that is not necessary for operational science) is to tell doubters that they are science deniers.  It is a lie.  No follower of Jesus should ever be frightened by it.  We bow to Jesus, not to the lies of the devil.

Reference

1. Genesis 1:26

How did atoms come alive?

As we wrote before, water, created by God, is essential.  In the universe and life, the hydrogen and oxygen in the water molecule is important.  For example,

  • There is hydrogen and oxygen in the molecules of acetic acid which gives vinegar its sour taste. 1
  • Hydrogen is especially important in hydro carbons. 2
  • Molecules consist of atoms (which include hydrogen and oxygen) that form organelles, cells, tissues, organs, organ systems and finally the organism. 3

#  How did life begin?

If one begins with the assembly of the atoms up to the living organism, the question is, how did it come alive?  The origin of life has kept many researchers busy for many years.  They pour big money, experience and sophisticated laboratories into this problem.  Yet no one has found evidence to prove that lifeless molecules became living organisms.

#  Did Richard Dawkins solve the origin of life issue?

No! In his book, The Greatest Show on Earth, The Evidence for Evolution, Bantam Press, 2009, he is silent on proofs for how non-life appeared as life on earth.

#  Does Wikipedia have the answer?

They claim the origin of life is a natural process. ‘Abiogenesis, or informally the origin of life is the natural process by which life arises from non-living matter, such as simple organic compounds.  The transition from non-living to living entities was not a single event but a gradual process of increasing complexity.’  They give no scientific evidence to prove their statement.

#  Does anybody else have the answer? 

Carl Zimmer wrote about it in Science: How Darwin envisioned it: In 1871, he [Darwin] outlined the problem in a letter to his friend, botanist Joseph Hooker: “But if (and Oh! what a big if!) we could conceive in some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, etc., present, that a protein compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.”  That is speculation, not proven science. 

#  Does James Tour have an answer?

He is a synthetic chemist who knows what he is talking about.

  • ‘Tour has over 640 research publications and over 120 patents, with an H-index = 129 (107 by ISI Web of Science) and i10 index = 538 with total citations over 77,000 (Google Scholar).’ 4
  • In Lee Strobel‘s book “The Case For Faith” – the following commentary is attributed to Tour: “I build molecules for a living, I can’t begin to tell you how difficult that job is.  I stand in awe of God because of what he has done through his creation.  Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith.  If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God.” 5
  • What does he say about the origin of life?  ‘I have written a long article on the origin of life: http://inference-review.com/article/animadversions-of-a-synthetic-chemist.  It is clear, chemists and biologists are clueless.  I wrote, “Those who think scientists understand the issues of prebiotic chemistry are wholly misinformed.  Nobody understands them.  Maybe one day we will.  But that day is far from today.  It would be far more helpful (and hopeful) to expose students to the massive gaps in our understanding.  They may find a firmer—and possibly a radically different—scientific theory.  The basis upon which we as scientists are relying is so shaky that we must openly state the situation for what it is: it is a mystery.”  Note that since the time of my submission of that commentary cited above, articles continue to be published on prebiotic chemistry, so I will link to my short critiques of a few of those newer articles so that the interested reader can get an ongoing synthetic chemist’s assessment of the proposals: http://inference-review.com/article/two-experiments-in-abiogenesis.’ 6

Conclusion

The Genesis 1 account is called a ‘Creation myth.’  Yet if one looks at all the complexity of life, creation needs a super mind, with super powers.  The Bible identifies who created life.  It is the super wonderful God, the Ruler of the universe.

References

  1. Reece et al, Campbell Biology, Pearson, 2011, p 110
  2. Ibid, p 107
  3. Ibid, p 50-51
  4. wikipedia.org
  5. Cited by Wikipedia, Lee Strobel,  2000, The Case for Christ. p111
  6. James M Tour Group, Rice University, Updated August 2017