Creation: The Science of Information Part II
A Sunday guest post by my brilliant husband, Gregg.
Every Sunday, my clever husband offers me a “day of rest” by taking over the homemaker duties here. His primary topic, the Biblical Truth of Creation vs. Darwinism, is a subject that has broad reaching scientific, social, and metaphysical implications and is gaining more and more attention in our modern culture. For believers and non-believers alike, the primary purpose is to present scientific, historical, logical, and/or sociological data in an empirical and defensible fashion, as much as possible written in layman’s terms, and in a format suitable for supplementing any homeschool curriculum whether you choose to believe the Biblical account — or secular guesses — about the origins of human life on earth.
A Darwinian Primer
The 6 types of evolution taught in the average public school, the first 5 being types of Darwinian evolution, and the last being simple modifications or changes within kind and not even really “evolution” are:
- Cosmic evolution
- Stellar evolution
- Chemical evolution
- Abiogenesis—Life from non-life
- Micro-evolution (Changes within kind – not evolution)
Darwinism and Ignorance
With respect to Scientific laws, they are laws because they have repeatedly been shown to be true (they are always valid), they have never been refuted or contradicted, they are universal (true in Kentucky, Afghanistan, or on the moon), they do not vary in time, they are simple, and there are no exceptions. There are three domains and two divisions to which Scientific laws apply. The three domains are Life, Information, and Matter (which includes energy) and the two divisions are the material and the non-material.
These are all very important properties of Scientific laws.
When a notion comes along that seems likely only if one or more Scientific laws do not apply (are ignored), science is obliged to hold such notions to a very high degree of skepticism and rightly subject said notion to very critical analysis. In the coming months, I intend to show (again) that large portions of the Darwinist religion utterly ignore the laws of science. Thus, Darwinism appears ignorant with respect to the Scientific laws governing the natural universe.
Any time someone relies upon other than natural, or supernatural, events to explain a natural act, that constitutes faith. Darwinism requires a belief in the supernatural at each step of the evolutionary progression and, therefore, is a faith based religion.
The laws of thermodynamics, the law of cause and effect, the law of energy conservation, and the laws of motion are all considered simple, universal, always valid, and invariable facts as these laws apply to the material division and physical matter (and energy) in the universe. The law of biogenesis (life from life) is considered simple, universal, always valid, and an invariable fact as the law applies to the material division and all known life in the universe. The laws governing Information, such as that Information is always substitionary, applies to the non-material division and all known Information in the universe.
The fact is, examining the primary tenets of Darwinism in the light of actual science, and the Scientific Laws that govern the entire natural universe, is probably the primary basis for my conversion from Darwinian paganism back to the light of Christianity. It was at least the starting point all those years ago.
Cosmic Evolution Ignores Scientific Laws
Darwinian “Big Bang” starts with an assumption that there is nothing, then nothing explodes, and the shrapnel of the exploding nothingness forms absolutely everything. Cosmic evolution defies a multitude of Scientific laws.
Let’s start with the law of cause and effect. In short, every effect is preceded by a cause and the cause is always greater than the effect. Since Big Bang depends upon nothing being the cause of everything, this instantly defies the Law of Cause and Effect since nothing is never greater than anything and certainly is much less than everything.
In addition, if there is nothing (to include time and gravity) then nothing could not possibly cause the effect of nothing condensing. I know that sounded like a double negative, but read it again. Thus, Darwinism appears ignorant with respect to the scientific law governing all known causes and effects in the universe.
The Laws of Thermodynamics describe the qualities of thermal energy. Big Bang depends upon nothing condensing and getting so hot that it explodes. This utterly defies the laws of Thermodynamics. Nothing cannot condense, does not make good fuel, and cannot create friction even assuming it could. Thus, Darwinism appears ignorant with respect to the scientific law governing heat energy.
The Laws of Probability must be ignored for the current set of mathematical equations resulting in Big Bang to be valid. The equations are almost infinitely fine-tuned to meet the result which means they are almost infinitely unlikely. Thus, Darwinism appears ignorant with respect to the scientific laws governing probability.
The first Law of Information states that matter and energy cannot produce information through material processes. The organization that resulted from the hypothetical Big Bang explosion alleges that vast amounts of information were assembled entirely by material processes. This is in direct conflict with the first Scientific Law of Information. Ignoring this law means that Darwinian Big Bang is also ignorant to the Scientific laws governing Information itself.
The Light Travel principle dictates that light must have time to travel significant distances before it can be observed. Big Bang states that the entire universe is no more than 15.6 to 16 billion years old, yet we observe light that is allegedly from stars far greater in distance than 16 billion light years distant. Big Bang is in direct conflict with the Light Travel principle.
Abiogenesis Ignores Scientific Laws
The Scientific law of biogenesis is also called the law of life. It is the only known scientific law that applies to living things. Louis Pasteur formulated this law centuries ago. The law of biogenesis states that life can only ever come from life. That is, life arises from pre-existing life, not from nonliving material.
Darwinists like to point out that Pasteur formulated this law in opposition to spontaneous generation, not Darwinian evolution. Thus the quibbling point is that the law of life does not dispel Darwinian evolution. To which, the obvious answer is, of course it does, as anyone can immediately see. So-called abiogenesis is just a retread of spontaneous generation, at the end of the day.
Let me explain. One of the tenets of the Darwinist religion is that life can spring forth from dirt and rocks in a miraculous act of spontaneous generation that Darwinism calls abiogenesis — life coming from non-life. Not only has this notion never been supported by experimentation or empirical science, but it stands in direct opposition to the only known scientific law pertaining to life. Thus, Darwinism appears ignorant with respect to the scientific law governing all known life in the universe.
In addition, the first Law of Information states that matter and energy cannot produce information through material processes. The organization that resulted from the hypothetical abiogenesis event alleges that vast amounts of information were assembled entirely by material processes into proteins, RNA, DNA, and eventually a living cell. This is in direct conflict with the first Scientific Law of Information. Thus, Darwinism appears ignorant with respect to the scientific law governing all Information in the universe.
In the coming months, I intend to show how all aspects of Darwinism — the collected Unsubstantiated Conjecture about Unobserved Events in the Past Supported Primarily by a Philosophical Bias — ignores Scientific laws while masquerading as science. I will discuss so called stellar evolution, so called chemical evolution, and so called macro-evolution and point to various scientific laws that these religious beliefs ignore.
And while I am sure the rationalizations that result will prove highly entertaining, I don’t want anyone who reads these posts to lose sight of something. And that is the purpose behind these posts. There is truth in the universe. A principled person strives to live by truth. An intellectually honest person never stops investigating, never stops questioning, and never stops seeking the truth.
Tomorrow morning, if incontrovertible evidence appeared that the Bible was wrong — let’s say God sent Micheal to announce, “Hey, guys, I was just kidding about that part.” I would be forced to re-evaluate my belief structure because I am a principled, intellectually honest truth seeker.
I believe that anyone who can honestly and objectively look at Darwinism in the light of the truth must reject large parts of it as anything other than a well disguised pagan myth. It strikes me as ironic that the most vocal believers in Darwinism are also those who pride themselves on being too intellectually disciplined to believe in fairy tales, yet that is exactly what they are doing.
The truth is that in the beginning, GOD created and for by him all things were created. This statement of truth contains time, force, and action — it is quite possibly the most perfectly balanced scientific statement in the history of mankind.
May God Bless you and yours,