Evolutionists crow long and hard that their view of how everything came about is science and the Genesis account of creation is religion. However, both views are religious and the ideas behind evolution are not supported by real, that is, experimental science. In fact science consigns it to the waste paper basket. Let me explain. There are three main hypotheses on which they place their faith:

Hypothesis 1

In the beginning there was nothing; not a molecule, not an atom, not even light. It went bang and from that explosion came atoms and molecules, the perfectly formed cosmos and all of the laws of science that are present today. They are forced into this position because if there was something that exploded, then the logical question would be: Who created what exploded?

There are many problems with this idea, the first being; it is illogical because no one has ever observed something coming from nothing. Nothing can’t do anything, least of all create everything. The second is that it is not supported by the Cosmological Argument which basically states that for every effect there must have been a cause—if there is an explosion, then something must have caused it. The First Law of Thermodynamics is another problem because it states that the total energy plus matter in a closed system must remain constant. So to go from no energy/matter to all of the energy/matter that there is, is a violation. Also there is a violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics which in effect, states that entropy will increase for a closed system. That is, it will go from order to disorder. So the idea of chaos (an explosion) going to cosmos is a profound violation.

Hypothesis 2

They then propose that a group of molecules, which came from nothing, joined together and formed themselves into living, replicating cells of incomprehensible complexity. This is known as Chemical Evolution and defies all known laws of chemical combination. I know as someone holding a PhD in synthetic organic chemistry how difficult it is to get a chemical reaction to proceed to the desired result; if everything is not exactly right the result is a tarry mess. Molecules simply do not lie around waiting for other molecules to come along and join to them—they breakdown to smaller molecules.

As well, certain molecules must have their component parts joined in a very precise order. For example, there are 20 naturally occurring amino acids and when they join together to form proteins their order is of critical importance; one out of place in the hemochromatosis protein, which consists of 348 amino acids, gives rise to the extremely debilitating Type 1 hemochromatosis whereby the body consistently absorbs too much iron. Other examples are on page 27 of my book: A Defence of the Bible. The order of nucleotides (there are four) in DNA, amazingly, provides the information by which the species is able to construct itself. Mutations breakdown this order to varying degrees and there is a resultant degenerative effect. In fact, there are over 1,000 disorders that affect humans as a result of mutations.

Hypothesis 3

Darwin’s theory is that all life came from living single cell species, he seemingly did not worry about where the living cells came from, and diversity came about by a process of natural selection and later, people added mutations as a cause of diversity. However, both processes can be shown to reduce functional genetic information, while evolution requires a huge increase in going from bacteria to humans. For example, a single cell bacterium has about 500,000 nucleotides (or base pairs) joined together to form its DNA, whereas humans have 3.2 billion. Atheists, evolutionists and fellow travellers are unable to propose viable mechanisms for this enormous increase.

Conclusion

I give many more examples of the impossibility of life coming from non-life in my book. I prefer to believe that: In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth; it requires less faith. However I will leave the last word on the subject to George Wald, a 1967 Nobel Prize winner for medicine and an evolutionist who stated:

“When it comes to the origin of life there are only two possibilities–creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance!”

Dr Wald was right of course, either nothing created everything out of nothing or a Supernatural Being created everything out of nothing. The first possibility is illogical, but with the second, a Supernatural Being has contacted us and told us that it was Him who did the creating and we can read about Him in the Bible and how He did it, in Genesis chapters one and two.

Gary J Baxter