A few months ago, I was blessed to attend an information seminar focusing on biological information. For many years, evolutionists really never considered that all biological systems - whether "the system" is an entire organism (like a bacterium, insect, duck or human) or "the system" is something within the organism that makes it work (like the Kreb's cycle or the cytochrome p-450 enzyme system) - it requires biological information to build and maintain those systems. That information is contained in the organism's DNA and it had to come from somewhere. The question, which the naturalistic process of evolution cannot answer is, "Where?" Here's why.
Consider the following two-pronged question (because if there is no naturalistic answer, then there is no evolution): "Where did biological information originate and how does the amount of information systematically increase in meaningful ways so that a bacterium could turn into an amoeba, which in turn changed into a fish, reptile, bird and mammal?" This is precisely the question that needs to be clearly answered in order for evolutionists to have a valid scientific argument....which they don't because they have no scientifically provable answer.
Oh, yes, they do use really fancy concepts and words like "polyploidy," "translocation" and "gene duplication" and others. The problem is that none of these mechanisms - or any other known genetic process(es) - increase the amount of information within an organism. These processes may duplicate already existing genetic content, but the increase in genetic content is either not information that codes for processes/traits OR it is information that is already contained in the organism in the first place (i.e. it isn't new). These processes may swap genetic information from one chromosome to another, but new information-containing mutation events have never been observed. It would be like taking pages from a book randomly, copying them, and then inserting them back into the book randomly along with the original pages. There would certainly be more letters and words in the "new" book, but those "new" pages do not transmit any meaningful information. It is all just mixed up gobble-ty-gook. Such is the same for all known genetic events that evolutionists rely upon to genetically explain evolution. Therefore, from an information standpoint, if there is no natural way for biological systems to acquire new genetic information, then there is no way for evolution to occur.
The problem is that none of these mechanisms - or any other known genetic process(es) - increase the amount of information within an organism.
Well, now, here is where the biological information seminar comes into play. There are scientists - well-respected scientists - from all over the world who understand that the information encoded into all life forms cannot be explained by evolution (as I just outlined - very briefly - above). One would think that these scientists are all fundamental Christians. That is certainly what the media and the scientific establishment would have you believe because if they are "religious zealots," then their objection to evolution as an explanatory mechanism for the diversity of life can easily be written off.
The interesting thing is, that is not the case. There were scientists at this seminar that were of all faiths, no faith and MANY are evolutionists! It was fascinating. The belief common at this seminar was not that God created the world and everything in it and is the responsible intelligent originator of all biological information, but that evolutionary mechanisms cannot explain the origin or complexity of biological information. It is an extraordinary side note that, in every other single instance where we identify the presence of "information," we inherently know that said "information" had an intelligent originator....except if the information encodes and transmits the most complicated information to which man has been exposed. The scientists shared their research related to biological information. It was incredibly interesting and, even though the experimental designs were very intricate, they still don't do credit to THE Originator!
Until Next Time! Science Shepherd
Subscribe for the latest news and receive 10% off and a FREE resource!