The Origin of Information

By Mark Eastman, M.D. and Chuck Missler

Would a DNA molecule that arose by chance possess any information, codes, programs, or instructions?


"And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so"
Genesis 1:11 (KJV)

     When George Wald and Francis Crick stated that the spontaneous origin of life was "impossible," they were speaking primarily about the origin of the cellular "hardware." Indeed, when we consider the effect of equilibrium, the reversibility of biochemical reactions in water and the fact that the building blocks of life are not safe in the air or on the land,1 spontaneous biogenesis stands shoulder to shoulder with raising the dead and walking on water - events which also defy the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the Law of Chemical Equilibrium - something which cannot be explained by natural law. However, for the purpose of this chapter we will allow that sometime on the earth the oceans became filled with spontaneously derived DNA.

     The question we must now answer is this: Would a DNA molecule that arose by chance possess any information, codes, programs, or instructions? To put it another way - can information, codes, or programs arise by chance? In the last half of the twentieth century, evidence has accumulated which has decisively answered this question. The answer profoundly impacts the debate on the existence of God.

Encyclopedia on a Pinhead: Chance or Design

     At the moment of conception, a fertilized human egg is about the size of a pin head. Yet, it contains information equivalent to about six billion "chemical letters." This is enough information to fill 1000 books, 500 pages thick with print so small you would need a microscope to read it! If all the DNA chemical "letters" in the human body were printed in books, it is estimated they would fill the Grand Canyon fifty times! The source of this information (the "software") is at the very core of the debate on the origin of life.

     When Carl Sagan said, "The cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be," he was expressing the materialists' position that the universe is a closed system.2 That is, they believe that no information or matter can be inserted into our universe from outside our space-time domain. Consequently, with no intelligent source, materialists are forced to conclude that the sum total of the information on the DNA molecule arose by chance.

     On the other hand, creationists believe that a transcendent Creator pierced the veil of our universe and infused information and order onto the chains of the DNA molecule. Again we see that the debate boils down to chance or design. To settle this debate we must look at the nature of information as defined in the field of information science.

The Nature of Information Systems

     The modern field of information science has revolutionized our daily lives in the last four decades. Computers, fax machines, cellular phones and many other daily conveniences would not have been possible without the rapid advances in the field of information theory.

     In recent years information engineers have examined the nature of the genetic code and concluded that it is an error correcting digital coding system. While digital coding systems can be very complex, error correcting digital codes are much less common and much more complex. Furthermore, the DNA molecule has built-in redundancy. That is, the same packet of information (called a gene) is often located in more than one place in the organism's DNA. Consequently, if one gene becomes corrupted with informational errors, the backup gene will take over the function of that gene! This level of complexity is found in only the most sophisticated computer system.

     The DNA coding system can be compared to that of a compact disc. The music on a compact disc is stored in a digital fashion and can only be appreciated if you have a knowledge of the language convention used to create the information on the disc. Appropriate machinery, which functions to translate that code into music, is also required for the music to be played. In a compact disc player this decoding process involved dozens of electronic and moving parts.

     It isn't much different in the living cell. The information carried by the DNA molecule contains the instructions for all the structures and functions of the human body. Within each cell resides all the necessary hardware to decode and utilize that information.

     When we look at a compact disc, we see no evidence of the musical information stored on the disc's surface. We see only the rainbow effect on the surface of the disc. Without the knowledge of the language convention used to create the disc and the machinery to translate it, we must simply be content with the colorful surface. This is exactly the same dilemma we face with spontaneously derived DNA or any information storage system.3

     If we examine the sequence of nucleotides on the DNA molecule, they simply have the appearance of a long chain of chemicals and not the appearance of a message system or a code. It is only when one possesses a knowledge of the language convention (the genetic code) and the appropriate machinery to translate the coded information on the DNA molecule, that the nucleotide sequence becomes understandable. Without such knowledge and machinery, the sequences on a spontaneously derived DNA molecule are meaningless.

     Consequently, the enormous challenge facing the scientific materialist is to explain how a language convention (the genetic code) and the necessary cellular machinery to translate the information stored on the DNA molecule arose independently without intelligent guidance.

     The chicken-egg dilemma has confounded scientists for decades. Chemist John Walton noted the dilemma in 1977 when he stated:

     "The origin of the genetic code presents formidable unsolved problems. The coded information in he nucleotide sequence is meaningless without the translation machinery, but the specification for his machinery is itself coded in the DNA. Thus without the machinery the information is meaningless, but without the coded information, the machinery cannot be produced. This presents a paradox of the 'chicken and egg' variety, and attempts to solve it have so far been sterile."4

     By allowing the spontaneous generation of long chains of DNA, what would you have? Do those chains of nucleotides possess a code or a program? Of course not. What you have is an admittedly complex chemical which has the potential of carrying a code or information. However, there is no inherent information on such spontaneously generated DNA unless a system of interpreting those sequences exists first. A couple of simple examples will help us to understand the nature of this dilemma.

"Save Our Souls!"

     If I were to show you a sign which had painted on it the sequence, dot, dot, dot, dash, dash, dash, dot, dot, dot, and if you were knowledgeable in Morse Code, you would know that this means S-O-S, and that I am in trouble. However, if I take that same sign to an isolated tribe of South American Indians, they will see the unlikely arrangement of dots and dashes, but there will be no information content transmitted to them without the knowledge of the language convention we call Morse Code.

The English Language

     Similarly, if I take a book written in English and hand it to an Australian Bushman, it will make absolutely no sense without a prior knowledge of the English language convention. Just like the dots and dashes, the 26 letters of the English language have no inherent information in them. Their shapes have the appearance of order (reduced entropy) but by themselves they are meaningless. It is when you "sheperd" or gather the letters into specific sequences, as determined by the rules of the previously existent language convention, that their arrangement begins to have meaning. Unless the language convention and the hardware (the human brain) to interpret it exists first, the arrangement of the letters can transmit no meaning.

Primordial Disk Soup

     The magnetic disks used to store and retrieve information in computers provides another fascinating analogy to the DNA molecule. When I purchase a blank computer disk, have I purchased a code or a program? No. I have only purchased a chemical medium which has the potential to carry a code or a program. However, to possess real information the blank disk must be formatted and programmed by a computer which was in turn built for this purpose.

     While the disk is being formatted a "program" is placed on it from an intelligent source (the computer) that exists outside and separate from the disk. This is accomplished by arranging the iron atoms on the disk in a predetermined fashion according to the rules of the computer's language convention. Once the disk is formatted and imputed with information, it weighs no more than it did before this procedure was done. This is because information has no mass or weight.

     As in the case of the 26 letters of the English alphabet, the structure or shape of the iron atoms on the disk does not convey or possess any information in and of itself. Rather, information ( a code or program) is conveyed by the orderly arrangement of the iron atoms. This arrangement of atoms is then interpreted by the computer's hardware according to the predetermined rules of the its language convention. Without the hardware and the pre-existent language convention, the arrangement of the iron atoms is meaningless.

     Does the computer create its own language convention? Obviously not. Just as the hardware requires intelligent design, so does the computer's language convention require an intelligent source - a computer programmer.

     By allowing an ocean of spontaneously derived DNA, I have given you the equivalent of an ocean full of blank floppy disks! In order for the DNA molecule to carry information, its molecules need to be arranged in a specific sequence as predetermined by the chemical code or language convention. But the language convention must exist first. According to the principles of modern information theory, language conventions come only from an intelligent source - a mind!

     Miller and Urey were able to produce the unlikely, ordered building blocks of proteins. In the future someone may even produce nucleotides by chance chemical processes. However, without a pre-existent language convention, these chemical letters will be no more effective in transmitting information than a random sequence of beads on a string, iron atoms in a disc, or letters on a page.

Codes by Chance?

     In the twentieth century, theories on the origin of the chemical hardware in living systems have come and gone with each generation.5 However, theories on the origin of codes and programs are few and far between. The claim by creationists that codes, programs and languages conventions, such as the genetic code, arise only from intelligent sources is often protested by scientific materialists (although most information engineers have no problem with this statement). Yet no one has come up with a rational theory on how true information, which is the antithesis of chance, can arise by random chance processes. As we will see, however, this problem has led to some irrational solutions.

     One of the most celebrated theories on the origin of information by chance comes from materialist Manfried Eigen. In his book Das Spiel, Eigen attempts to show how a code or program might develop by chance. Eigen argues that if the letters of the genetic code can arise by chance, then why not the words, the sentences, the paragraphs and entire book.

     Eigen envisions a machine that possesses the remarkable ability to generate, by chance, the letters of the English language and then randomly shuffle and combine those letters for millions of years. After examining the volumes of randomly generated letters we find some rather amazing combinations. The machine has generated "AND," "MAN," "DOG," "CAT," "The Lord is my sheperd, I shall not want..." We stand back and see that indeed, this machine has generated meaningful sentences. Eigen argues that this is proof of the random chance production of information. Is this true?

     In his book, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution, A.E. Wilder-Smith demonstrated the fallacy of Eigen's argument. Wilder-Smith invites a non-English speaking friend from Switzerland to examine the output of the machine. Again the machine puts out the random sequences such "HAT," "FISH," "BOY," etc. His Swiss friend stares at the machine with a blank look, quite unlike the smile an Englishman might carry. While the Englishman stands amazed at the randomly generated information, our Swiss friend points out that the sequences have no meaning to him at all because he has no knowledge of the English language convention.

     Eigen's argument that "true information" has been generated by chance, is erroneous because he interprets his sequences by the rules of a previously existing language convention we call the English language. But where did the rules of English come from?

     Wilder-Smith points out that the sequence of letters has meaning only when we "hang" the rules and the conventions of the English language on the sequences themselves. Just as dots and dashes are meaningless without a knowledge of the Morse Code, so too are the random arrangements of any letters, chemicals, beads, or magnetic medium meaningless without rules and conventions by which we interpret the sequences. But the rules of any language system are themselves arbitrary (i.e. man-made), abstract agreements between at least two intelligences which declare that a specific sequence of letters has a certain meaning.6 Put another way, the rules of any language system are neither a part of nor conveyed by any natural laws of nature. Therefore, a language convention, with its rules and regulations, must be devised first.

     Information engineers know that language conventions will not, cannot, and do not arise by chance. Every information engineer or computer programmer knows that chance must be eliminated if one is to successfully write a code or program. In fact, chance is the very antithesis of information.

     If Bill Gates of Microsoft Corporation commissioned you to write a new software program and you simply began to type randomly on your computer with the hope that a new language or program might result, you would likely be assisted to a psychiatric facility for an extended medical leave of absence. We know intuitively that this method will never result in the generation of new information.

     Yet, according to evolutionary dogma, the random shuffling of nucleotides for millions of years supposedly produced not only the DNA molecule but the code which governs the storage and retrieval of the information it carries as well. If we make such a claim, are we not, in effect, asserting that formatted computer floppy disks, which are filled with millions of bits of information, can arise by the random combining of iron oxide and plastic rather than being the product of an intelligent source which is outside and separate from the floppy disk?

The Monkey and the Typewriter

     For centuries scientists have suspected that living systems contain a mechanism for the storage and retrieval of information used for cellular metabolism and reproduction. With the elucidation of the structure of DNA in 1953 and the subsequent deciphering of the genetic code in the 1960's this was finally confirmed. However, the debate on the origin of this cellular information predates the actual discovery of the DNA molecule by at least 100 years.

     As in the case of the cellular "hardware," evolutionists have also appealed to the magic ingredient of time to explain the origin of the information, the "software," stored by living systems. Since the 1700's scientific materialists have argued that, given enough time, anything was possible, even the origin of the complex programs necessary for the production of life. Creationists, on the other hand, have argued that where there is design there must be a designer and where there are codes or language conventions there must be an architect for such information.

     On June 30, 1860, at the Oxford Union in England, this was the very topic in the "Great Debate" between the Anglican Archbishop of Oxford University, Samuel Wilberforce and evolutionist and agnostic, Thomas Huxley.

     Bishop Wilberforce, a Professor of Theology and Mathematics at Oxford University, applied the logic of the teleological argument for God. He argued, as did William Paley, that the design we see in nature required a Designer. Therefore, the information (an evidence for design) found in living systems could not arise by chance.

     Huxley, on the other hand, declared that given enough time all the possible combinations of matter, including those necessary to produce a man, will eventually occur by chance molecular movement. To prove his point Huxley asked Wilberforce to allow him the service of six monkeys that would live forever, six typewriters that would never wear out and an unlimited supply of paper and ink. He then argued that given an infinite amount of these monkeys would eventually type all of the books in the British Library including the Bible and the works of Shakespeare!

     Applying the mathematical law of probability, Huxley showed that if time (T) is infinite, then the probability (P) of an event happening is equal to one, i.e., one hundred percent.7 Consequently, he argued that with an infinite amount of time any and all combinations of letters, including the necessary chemical combinations to produce life, will eventually be typed out purely by chance, without the necessity of a Creator.

     Bishop Wilberforce, a skilled mathematician, was forced to concede the truth of Huxley's point. To this very day the Monkey/Typewriter argument is frequently applied by evolutionists when confronted with the question of the origin of life.

     Bishop Wilberforce lost the debate because he was unable to see the flaw in Huxley's argument. At the time of this debate the nature of biochemical reactions and the genetic code was not understood. Consequently, Huxley's argument seemed reasonable. When time is infinite the probability formula does indeed predict that all possible combinations of letters will occur. However, with the revolutionary discoveries in molecular biology and information science in the last four decades, Huxley's use of a typewriter to simulate the chemical reactions in living systems has, in fact, been shown to be erroneous.

     In the last chapter we saw that the chemical reactions in living systems, such as the combining of amino acids and nucleotides, are reversible. The reversibility of these chemical reactions is quite unlike those simulated by Huxley's typewriter.

     A century after the "Great Debate," Professor A.E. Wilder-Smith, who also studied at Oxford University, demonstrated the fallacy of Huxley's argument. Wilder-Smith points out that because the chemical reactions upon which our bodies run are reversible, for Huxley's argument to be valid, his monkeys would need to use typewriters which also type reversibly!8 With each key stroke such a typewriter places the ink on the paper, and when the key is released the inks jumps back onto the hammer of the typewriter leaving the paper reversibly without a trace!

     This is, in fact, a more accurate demonstration of what happens in biological reactions. The building blocks of life continually combine ("type in") and come apart ("type out") as the solution approaches a state of equilibrium. With a typewriter that types reversibly-typing in (bonding) and typing out (uncombining)-we will have typed as much in one minute as we would have in 5 billion years!9

     Huxley's argument is invalidated by the fact that the building blocks in biological reactions do not stay combined. The building blocks of DNA and proteins are driven (by the Second Law and chemical equilibrium) to break down (come apart) in the watery environment in which they supposedly arose.

     On the other hand, the hypothetical books typed by Huxley's monkeys are stable end products. They do not decompose (come apart) into their individual letters as do the building blocks of life. Therefore, Huxley's illustrations is an erroneous and inaccurate representation of biological systems.

     Finally, we saw that Stanley Miller's spark and soup experiment generated 50% right-handed and 50% left-handed amino acids. We saw that right-handed amino acids are, in many cases, poisonous to enzymes and living cells. Consequently, if the keys in Huxley's typewriter represent a true primordial soup, every other key stroke would be potentially lethal! How far do you think the monkeys would get toward typing the genetic code with such odds?

     In his character style, Sir Fred Hoyle comments on the improbability that Huxley's monkeys might type the genetic code:

     "No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning. Troops of monkeys thundering away at random on typewriters could not produce the works of Shakespeare, for the practical reason that the whole observable universe is not large enough to contain the necessary monkey hordes, the necessary typewriters, and certainly the waste paper baskets required for the deposition of wrong attempts. The same is true for living material."10

Time: Magic Bullet for Unlikely Villain

     When confronted with the many evidences against the spontaneous origin of life, the scientific materialist will inevitably and repeatedly appeal to the magic ingredient of prolonged time periods to accomplish biochemical possibilities. However, as in the case of the chemical "hardware," the addition of prolonged time periods does not increase the likelihood of spontaneously derived information.

     In the previous chapter on the origin of the cellular "hardware," we saw that the laws of thermodynamics and chemical equilibrium demand that all systems tend toward disorder with the advance of time. In the field of information science, these laws have enormous implications as well.

     When applied to the field of information science, the Second Law demands that the total amount of information in a closed system decreases as time advances.11 Put another way, as time advances the sum total of the information stored on magnetic tape, the pages of a book, or the sequences of a DNA molecule always degrades. This is, in fact, exactly what we observe with these media. As time advances, DNA molecules collect informational errors (mutations) and the organism eventually dies. Ancient scrolls lose their ink. Old recordings become filled with informational noise. In each case the result is always the same-loss of information.

     The Theory of Evolution demands that just the opposite occurs. To change an amoebae into a human being requires a million-fold increase in the information stored in the DNA of each cell. According to evolutionary theory, this increase in information must also occur without any intelligent guidance. Such an occurrence would not only breach a foundational truth of information theory-that true information comes only from a mind-it would also defy the Second Law of Thermodynamics which demands that the information stored on the DNA molecule must degrade and not increase.12

     In their book Evolution from Space, materialists Sir Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe address the problem of the origin of the information carried on the DNA molecule:

     "From the beginning of this book we have emphasized the enormous information content of even the simplest living systems. The information cannot in our view be generated by what are often called 'natural' processes, as for instance through meteorological and chemical processes occurring at the surface of a lifeless planet. As well as a suitable physical and chemical environment, a large initial store of information was also needed [for the origin of life]. We have argued that the requisite information came from an 'intelligence,' the beckoning spectre."13 (Emphasis added)

     In this remarkable statement, Hoyle and Wickramasinghe admit that living systems require "enormous" amounts of information for their construction. This information, they conclude, cannot be generated by "natural" or random chemical processes. Consequently, they assert that the source of the information is from an "intelligence."

     The implications of this admission by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe are mind boggling. Since, in their opinion, chance "chemical processes occurring at the surface of a lifeless planet [earth]" cannot create new information, then the source of information found in living systems must have been of extraterrestial origin!

ET: The Sower of Life?

     By the end of the 1960's the evidence from thermodynamics, mathematical probability and information theory were taking their toll on the Oparin-Haldane-Miller paradigm. With each new discovery in molecular biology the concept of spontaneous generation gradually took on the appearance of a miracle, rather than an unlikely accident of chemistry.

     In the 1970's speculation on the origin of life took an unexpected and bizarre turn. Because the laws of chemistry, physics and mathematical probability so mitigate against the possibility of spontaneous generation, scientists began to look for an extraterrestrial source for the origin of life!

     Francis Crick, co-discoverer of DNA, and one of the most respected molecular biologists in the world, has conceded that the spontaneous origin of life on earth is "almost a miracle." Consequently, since life could not have arisen by chance, he proposed that the first life forms on earth were single-celled "spores" delivered here from interstellar space!14,15 This theory, called "Directed Panspermia," then asserts that these "interstellar spores" subsequently evolved into all the life forms on earth. Similar conclusions were drawn by Hoyle in his book Evolution From Space.16

     These men recognized that something beyond the bounds of planet earth was required to generate the information and complexity found within living systems.

     Scientists recognize that there are only two options for the origin of life: intelligent design or spontaneous biogenesis. Faced with the apparent impossibility of spontaneous biogenesis on earth, one might have suspected that these men would invoke a supernatural, extra-dimensional, intelligent Creator for the origin of life. However, this was not the case. Crick, and others, have concluded that since life could not have arisen by chance on planet earth, the laws of chemistry and physics must, therefore, be more favorable elsewhere in the cosmos and that life arose there first and was later delivered to earth.

     Michael Denton comments on this bizarre twist:

     "Nothing illustrates more clearly just how intractable a problem the origin of life has become than the fact that world authorities can seriously toy with the idea of panspermia."17

     The dramatic shift from a theistic, Judeo-Christian world view to a secularized, neo-Darwinian "age of reason" was accomplished, in part, by those who desired to explain away the biblical miracle of creation. It is ironic, therefore, that as we approach the end of the twentieth century some of the world's most prominent scientists are forced to conclude that life on earth had an extraterrestial origin. This is, in theory, exactly what the Bible has said all along. However, the "Extraterrestial" the Bible speaks of is not just from beyond earth, but from beyond time and space as well!

     The assertion that elsewhere in the universe the laws of physics and chemistry are more favorable for the origin of life is not supported by even a shred of scientific evidence. To invoke such an explanation is, in effect, an appeal to something outside the bounds of natural laws, i.e., a metaphysical, supernatural cause.

     In 1981 Sir Fred Hoyle commented on this appeal to metaphysics:

     "I don't know how long it is going to be before astronomers generally recognize that the combinatorial arrangement of not even one among the many thousands of biopolymers [DNA, RNA, proteins] on which life depends could have been arrived at by natural processes here on the Earth. Astronomers will have a little difficulty at understanding this because they will be assured by biologists that this is not so, the biologists having been assured in their turn by others that it is not so. The 'others' are a group of persons who believe, quite openly, in mathematical miracles. They advocate the belief that tucked away in nature, outside of normal physics, there is a law which performs miracles (provided the miracles are in the aid of biology). This curious situation sits oddly on a profession that for long has been dedicated to coming up with logical explanations of biblical miracles."18 (Emphasis added)

     If we are to assume that the laws of physics and chemistry are essentially uniform throughout the physical universe, then we must logically conclude that life could not have arisen by chance anywhere in the universe.

     Even if the laws of physics were found to be more favorable in a distant corner of the universe, there would still be no explanation for the coded information (which does not arise by chance) that is carried by the DNA molecule.

     Consequently, the source of the cellular "hardware" as well as the information carried by the DNA molecule must have been an intelligent, extra-dimensional one - beyond the bounds of space and time.

"Of the Dust of the Ground"

     The evidence presented thus far has brought us to a remarkable conclusion. As we have seen, the order and complexity in the universe is well beyond the reach of chance. We have seen that to "wind up" and order the physical universe requires the introduction of energy and intelligent guidance from a source outside the bounds of the space-time domain. Furthermore, the enormous complexity of living systems and the nature of the information on the DNA molecule cannot be explained by natural laws within the dimension of our universe.

     Surely, at the dawn of the twentieth century, few scientists would have anticipated that their quest to explain the existence of the universe on natural grounds would have brought us to the point where their own discoveries now demand the existence of the very Creator they were trying to explain away! Any yet, this is exactly what has occurred.

     To create the universe and its life forms the Creator must, of necessity, be transcendent. To create the universe in the first place He must have preceded it. Secondly, to order and establish the matter within galaxies, solar systems and living beings, He would need to "enter," in effect, the arena of space-time that He created. This ability to simultaneously exist inside and outside the dimensions of the universe demands a transcendent, supernatural Creator.

     To many, invoking a supernatural cause for the origin of the universe is abhorrent. However, to invoke the god called "chance" is, according to many, a belief in "mathematical miracles." So we must choose between mathematical miracles, without a supernatural agent to perform them, or a transcendent Creator-the "First Cause," who ordered and established the universe and its life forms. The god called "chance" or intelligent design? You must choose.

     For thousands of years the Bible has revealed a transcendent Creator who acted prior to the origin of our space-time domain.19 To create the universe and life on earth, He transcended time and space, then inserted information or know-how onto matter. The result was the birth of an ordered, energized universe filled with information and every appearance of contrivance and design.

     The Bible declares that this same Creator entered time and space physically in the person of Jesus Christ. Finally, the Bible authenticates the authority of its message by demonstrating that its text came from a transcendent, supernatural Being who exists beyond time and space.

For more papers on this and other related subjects;
Go back to the Main Page (XWALK.CA)

Reference: Mark Eastman, M.D. and Chuck Missler, "The Creator Beyond Space and Time", Copyright 1996 The Word For Today. p.67-82

Chuck Missler's Organization


1.Due to the destructive effects of oxygen and UV radiation

2. Carl Sagan, Cosmos. (Random House, New York, 1980). pg. 4.

3. During the time of recorded history there have been dozens of information storage and retrieval systems developed by man. The use of clay tablets, ink on paper, beads on a string and modern computers have all been used to store and retrieve information. No matter what medium mankind has used, all of these systems share two vital elements. Each of the systems uses a material medium (air molecules to carry voice, clay tablets, beads, etc...) to carry the information. Secondly, each of the systems employs the use of specific rules and regulations which determine the meaning of the arrangement of the letters on a page, beads on a string or impressions on a tablet. Consequently, the information in the Encyclopedia Britannica can just as surely be stored by beads on a rope as it can with a compact disc.

4. John Walton, "Organization and the Origin of Life" Origins, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1977, pp. 30-31.

5. In the last decade a number of scientists have proposed that RNA and not DNA was the first self duplicating molecule upon which life arose. The function of information storage was later transferred to DNA which evolved later. However, RNA is even more unstable in water. Its chemical bonds are even more sensitive to the destructive effects of equilibrium in a watery environment. All of the processes that are destructive to DNA are even more destructive to RNA. Furthermore, spontaneously derived RNA would also contain NO information. Others have claimed that the first life forms were clay based self reproducing systems (See Shapiro). However, no rational system of converting silica or clay based life to carbon based life is imaginable. Further, where did the information for reproduction, growth, metabolism and repair come from in clay based systems?

6. This is one of the fascinating evidences that God exists in at least two personages.

7. According to the probability formula Pt=l-(l-Pl)t , when time (t) is infinity then the probability of any event happening Pt approaches 100%.

8. A.E. Wilder-Smith, The Natural Sciences Know Nothing of Evolution, The Word for Today, Costa Mesa, Ca.

9. The problem is even worse for biological systems. Because of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Law of Mass Action, amino acids and nucleotides "type out" far more readily than they "type in" in a watery environment.

10. Sire Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe, Evolution from Space: A Theory of Cosmic Creationism (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1981), pgs. 148.

11. In the field of information science, this is actually a corollary to the Second Law. Applied to information storage and retrieval systems the Second Law demands that the net amount of information in a closed system always decreases as time advances. A closed system is an environment in which no information, matter or energy can be added or removed from beyond its boundaries. Applied to biology, the sum total of genetic information within an interbreeding pool of genes will degrade with the advance of time. This is the very cause of extinction in biological systems. In breeding situations bringing in "new blood" (new alleles) into an isolated breeding population has the effect of stabilizing the population and delaying the inevitable extinction. In this situation new information is "injected" into the a gene pool that was, in effect, previously a closed system.

12. The Second Law, applied to information theory, demands that in order for the information in a system to increase it must be inserted from outside the system from an intelligent source. Since the net amount of information in a closed system decreases with the advance of time and since, according to materialists, our universe is a closed system, then at the beginning of time, the total amount of information in the universe was at a maximum. Since information does not arise by chance, the challenge for the materialist is to determine where it came from in the first place?

13. Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, op. cit., pg. 150.

14. Francis Crick, Life Itself, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1981.

15. Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel, "Directed Panspermia", Icarus, 19:341-46.

16. Fred Hoyle, Evolution from Space; 1981.

17. Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, pg. 271, Adler and Adler, 1986.

18. Hoyle, Sir Fred, "The Big Bang in Astronomy, New Scientist, 19 November 1981, p. 526.

19. II Timothy 1:9 "who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began." Also, Ephesians 1:4 "just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love."

For more papers on this and other related subjects;
Go back to the Main Page (XWALK.CA)

Presented by Trinity Consulting