Physics of Faith

I hope that this information will be enlightening. Not just in what you learn regarding the facts that seem to point to the existence of a master intelligence, but also enlightening in another way, the way that we are being manipulated. By whom, I'm really not sure, spiritual warfare can be very covert and devious, but manipulated, nonetheless. Am I a conspiracy theorist? Not unless a conspiracy exists.

When you ask most people if they believe in God, they will say, yes. In fact, in the United States over 80% of the people say that they do. When asked why, the reasons will vary widely. Many will say that they don't see how a world like this could be here if it were not for a God. Others might point to some esoteric concepts like beauty, love, or grace. They would ask, "How could these things be here if there were no God?" Very few would try to use something as spiritually antiseptic as science to explain their beliefs. But wouldn’t it be interesting if we could in fact use Science to provide evidence of the existence of God? After all, it is the foundation for proof of almost everything else in our universe, even things that we haven't been able to directly observe, so if there is a God wouldn’t Science have to at least uphold that concept? At the risk of spoiling the ending, I believe that this presentation will clearly demonstrate how Science doesn’t only support the concept of God but taken in its entirety, it demonstrates that this Universe is simply not feasible without a Divine Architect.

I will try to take both general information and scientific observations and present them in a way that you may not have considered before or have learned. I believe that each of these points will be very convincing on their own merit, and just like in the game, as you connect these "dots", you may see a clear picture emerge. It’s up to you to determine if that picture is the hand of God.

Most people would view the two areas, Science and Spirituality as very diverse, and many would actually say that they are in opposition. Science is the search for the understandable, the explainable, the provable, the applicable and finally, the predictable. It is a way for us to understand and possibly even control our environment and by extension, our lives. Science provides simple and complex solutions that attempts to explain the nature of life around us and any notion of God appears to be unnecessary, superfluous at best. Ironically, the church has taken a somewhat similar approach. For the church, scientific observations are generally ignored, even dismissed. In the past, the church has even condemned many scientific discoveries as heresy. Today the church simply does not look towards science to help bolster their case of the existence of God, and although I can understand why they may choose to take this position, it leaves a gaping hole in our knowledge of what science is really telling us regarding God. If the church doesn’t embrace and communicate these concepts, it inhibits many of us from understanding some extremely important information.

The problem in our society is even greater than this, however. Not only is there a lack of knowledge of the congruence between science and faith, but there are also misconceptions; lies if you will. And these misconceptions have become so pervasive that the general population believes them without question. We’ll see that many of these misconceptions in fact contain grains of truth. But that is the nature of the con game. The con man gives you pieces of truth. Small things that pan out if and when you check, but that’s where the truth ends. You’re led to believe more than what is proven and that’s the key to the con.

The whole problem with this separation of religion and science is that people with faith believe that they are sitting out there on the end of a limb, believing in something that scientific study would not support. Many people are content with this arrangement. But how much stronger would at least some people’s Faiths be if they knew the truth about our Universe and everything in it. So, let’s get to it. Some of the questions that I’ll specifically address are; How did the Universe get here? What is the Big Bang and why is it relevant? What about life? Did it actually begin when lightning hit a sea of chemicals on an ancient earth? Did Man evolve from monkeys and great apes? Isn’t our existence, our world around us, pretty well understood by our scientists? Why do we need God as an explanation for any of this?

We believe that the laws of nature pretty much explain all of the physical things in the universe. For example, Galileo brought us the laws of inertia. He told us that a body in motion or rest tends to stay that way unless acted upon by another force. We agree because our experience supports these things. I put this pencil down and it stays there. On Thanksgiving your uncle Bob hits the couch and watches the Lions loose a football game and he doesn’t move, unless acted on by another force, like your aunt. In fact, the reason that he undoes that button on his pants isn’t really to gross anyone out. He knows that that baby is coming off one way or the other by halftime so he might as well release the force acting on it. He knows that according to Galileo if it wasn’t for some well understood laws of physics like gravity or friction, that button could put someone’s eye out. He’s actually just practicing safe slacks.

Okay let’s start with the agreed upon facts. The universe began as a singularity called the Big Bang about 13.7B years ago. Before it, neither space nor time existed. Now when I say that space and time didn’t exist, I’m not trying to be clever. It’s not like a tree falling in the woods. I’m not saying there was no time because there weren’t people or watches. It literally means time did not exist. All the matter in the universe was compressed into a dot smaller than an atom and for some reason that no scientist can explain that dot kind of exploded outward. Scientists also don’t explain what was outside of that dot. They think of it as nothing, a void. That’s something that we can’t really understand because we generally think of empty space as a void. But actually, space itself was created and exploded outward in all directions with a tremendous amount of energy, heat and photons of erupting light. The space initially exploded in a period called inflation which made it move unbelievably fast, faster than the speed of light. According to Einstein, nothing within our universe can move faster than light but we’re not talking about anything within space. We’re saying that space itself moved faster than the speed of light in this initial stage. Now this is a very important point. Because for a very long time we believed that the Universe was static and was always here. And many people felt that if you’re going to believe in something that was always here, it’s a lot easier to believe that a bunch of dust and gases were here instead of something infinitely more complex, an all knowing, all powerful entity such as God. We know that all this occurred because we know that the universe is expanding. Einstein showed this in his general theory of Relativity in 1915, but even he didn’t believe it, so he invented an antigravity factor called the cosmic coefficient that he inserted into his equations. Think of it as if you strategically inserting a smiley face in your algebra homework that magically enables you to get to the right answer. You’d never get away with it but hey, who’s going to question Einstein? Later he admitted that this was the biggest blunder of his life. We also know that the Universe is expanding because someone named Hubble, who later had a telescope named after him, studied the light emanating from distant galaxies and noticed a red shift. This was important because a guy named Doppler, (you know him because the weather channels all use Doppler radar), studied the characteristics of waves and he noticed that waves that are coming toward you had different properties than those that are moving away. For example, sound waves make a very high-pitched noise as it comes toward you but has a lower pitch as it moves away. Think about the sound an ambulance makes as it approaches your car, and then how it sounds as it passes. The pitch is totally different. Well, the same thing occurs with light. An object coming to you throws off a blue based spectrum of light and one moving away is red shifted. Hubble noticed that just about all the galaxies are red shifted. (Actually, the red shift is now believed to be the result of space being stretched rather than the mass moving away from us but the result is the same). Then the smoking gun occurred in 1965 when two men, Anzio Penzias and Robert Wilson, from Bell Labs won the Nobel prize when they accidentally discovered that a cosmic background radiation permeated the universe in every direction. This was confirmed to be the residue from the Big Bang.

Now this simple fact, that there was in fact a beginning, a creation if you will, of the universe is extremely important. We did however know that the Bible indicated that the heavens and earth were created, that they were not always here. So, this discovery/realization within the last 50 years or so has in fact, thousands of years later, finally substantiated the Old Testament, that states “In the Beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth. What else does it say in Genesis? On the first day of creation God said what? “Let there be light”, which I always assumed was symbolic for wisdom or life. We now know this is actually and exactly what happened. The Big Bang started with a tremendous explosion of light particles.

Here, however is the amazing thing. The Big Bang has resulted in this extremely ordered and balanced Universe that is so symmetrical and balanced that we can use something as precise as mathematics to describe and predict its behavior. That in itself is amazing but the truly amazing thing is that when the Big Bang began, the odds of ending up with a Universe as precise as we have are astronomical, literally astronomical.

You see the Big Bang should have resulted in equal amounts of matter and antimatter which would cancel each other out. But in fact, a tiny amount more of matter than antimatter was created. That tiny amount continued to be formed and resulted in all of the matter in the Universe today.

Here’s another; because of entropy, (chaotic disorganization), for every star formed there should also have been countless billions of black holes. In fact, the odds of one, just one, star forming is a one with a billion billion zeros after it. The odds for our entire Universe to be formed? Let me explain. If I picked one grain of sand from any beach in the world and then asked you to go to any beach and pick one grain of sand; the odds that we would pick the same grain are approximately 8 x 10 to the 21st power, 8,000,000,000,000,000,000,000, or 8 sextillion. As large as that number is it was written in the space of about two inches. If I told you that the number of possible types of universes that could have occurred from the Big Bang needed a piece of paper as long as the distance from the Earth to the Sun, it would probably convince you that this Universe, (the only one that could support life), could not possibly have been a random accident. Keep in mind the distance between the Sun and the Earth is about 93,000,000 miles, or eight light minutes, (it takes light, traveling at 186,000 mi per second, a little over 8 minutes to reach us). It would be basically impossible, wouldn’t it? But that’s not what Science tells us! Scientists have in fact calculated that the piece of paper that would be needed just to write the ‘odds’ of our Universe being formed would not be two inches and not even eight light minutes long. You would need a piece of paper that would go from one end of the visible universe to the other end, a distance of about 20 billion light years. Think about that! Can anyone in their right mind think we just lucked out? One, in that tremendous number represents the odds that a Universe that could possibly support life would have been formed as a result of the Big Bang!

In fact, our Universe is so delicately balanced that if the pull of gravity and outward thrust of the initial Big Bang had differed by one part in 10 to the 60th power, our Universe could not have formed at all. Without that precision our Universe would not have been a possibility. Ten to the 60th power is about the precision needed to hit a 1 inch target with a bullet across the visible universe, 20B light years away.

The only answer that the skeptics have is that if time isn’t an issue, then theoretically it’s possible that that many universes actually occurred before this one came about, calling it a multiverse. A term that seems to give new meaning to “multi”. The other skeptics say okay, so what? We won an unbelievable lottery. Is that thinking plausible to you?

The planet and solar system that we live within must also meet some exacting specifications. For life to exist on Earth the temperature range must fall within 5 to 40 degrees C. This requires the Sun to burn with an extraordinary uniformity. It requires the Earth to have an almost perfectly circular orbit unlike the normal elliptical orbit found almost everywhere else. We must circle at an “exact” distance range from the Sun.

Gravity must be strong enough to prevent our atmosphere from evaporating into space but weak enough to allow us to stand and move about.

A layer of ozone must exist to protect us from deadly radiation.

A magnetic field emanating from our molten core must be there to protect us from being barraged by cosmic subatomic particles.

Let’s investigate a couple of other lotteries that we had to win. Most of us know that an atom is comprised of a nucleus which has neutrons, protons and electrons that exist outside the nucleus. You can break that down further but those are the basic pieces. Regardless of what kind of matter we’re talking about, a proton, neutron, or electron are exactly the same. Doesn’t matter if we’re talking about you, a Buick, or the family cat. The neutron and proton are almost the same size, and the electron is about 1,800 times smaller. I said the neutron and proton are almost the same size but not exactly. The neutron is slightly larger. If a proton were 1% heavier it would immediately decay in which case hydrogen couldn’t exist. This is a big problem because Hydrogen makes up 75% of everything in the Universe. No hydrogen, no stars. Stars, through the process of fusion, smashes hydrogen into helium and a whole lot of energy. No stars, no life. Another lottery we won.

There are 4 forces in the Universe, the strong force which holds the nucleus of atoms together; the weak force which allows atoms to decay; electromagnetic force, which encourages molecules to form, holds electrons in orbit and is responsible for light and other radio waves; and gravity, which Sir Isaac Newton described as Mass attracting Mass, (Einstein described as a straight line in curved space).

Okay the strong force is the precise value that allows hydrogen to transmute into helium in the stars and then into all of the other elements. Without that precise value, no life. Another lottery we won!

The weak force is in perfect balance with the strength of gravity that ensures that Hydrogen rather than helium is the dominant force in the Universe. If that’s not the case, we don’t exist. Another lottery that we won!

You see, for us to exist or any biological form of life to exist, we didn’t have to win one huge lottery, or two or three, we had to win all of them. Random accident, Unbelievable luck?

So there’s this guy who works with you, and when you tell him all of this he says, I don’t know about all of that stuff. I believe what I can touch and feel. He’s just not moving on this.

Well actually his ideas aren’t moving, but he is. He’s traveling at about 890 miles per hour as he rotates around the globe in his home in Atlanta. He’s moving at about 72,000 mph as the Earth rotates around the Sun and he’s moving at about 720,000 mph as the Solar System moves around the Milky Way.

He’s not aware of that and it turns out that he’s not aware of a lot of things. He believes in solid things. The Buick, his body, and the family cat. There’s no need to explain things with a God in the equation because to him, life is just pretty logical without one.

Let’s look at the human body. It’s made up of about 10 to the 27th power atoms. If we blow up an atom to make the nucleus the size of a baseball, the electrons are grains of sand and the whole atom is roughly a mile in diameter. That means that the solid part of you is very tiny. In fact, 99.999999999999 (12 9’s), of any solid, ain’t so solid. You, the Buick, the family cat are almost all empty space. Clap your hands. When you clap your hands it’s basically electromagnetic force that we feel repelling each other.

So, what we view as familiar, solid, reliable isn’t really what it seems. In Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, he proves that the speed of light is an absolute constant in the universe and. mass and time are moving targets. In a spaceship a ruler will quickly become 11 inches then ten and finally zero the faster the rocket moves approaching the speed of light. A second on that rocket ship can be a Billion Years to a civilization living on the planet Earth. A second on Earth is actually longer than a second on the Moon because of the gravity associated with the much different masses of these two heavenly bodies. In a black hole, Stephen Hawking, and Roger Penrose stated that time stops altogether. Therefore, Genesis can be easily describing a day literally not necessarily symbolically when it puts Creation into a span of 6 days. A day/hour/minute/second has a totally different value depending on where you are or how fast you are going.

This is in fact a wild, mysterious world that we live in. A Universe where the mysteries are not just due to ignorance on our part but due to truisms that boggle the mind. It turns out that those

laws of Nature that are so dependable in describing the visible Universe just don’t apply when we look at the world of atoms and subatomic particles, (the quantum world). Einstein and a particular colleague of his had heated debates about this. Einstein said there must be a unifying theory that encompasses everything, “God doesn’t play dice” was his famous statement. His colleague, Neals Bohr, said, “there doesn’t have to be one set of rules that govern the smallest parts of the Universe with the rest. God can play dice with the Universe if that’s what he wants. Who are we to say?” Einstein had a very technical term to describe the workings of the subatomic world. He called it, “Spooky”

It’s spooky for a lot of reasons. Everywhere else in the Universe we see a chain of events called cause and effect. You hit a baseball and it flies off the bat. An asteroid hits a planet like it did here on Earth sixty five million years ago and the ash and dust blots out the Sun and all mammals and all dinosaurs larger than a squirrel die out,. (Turns out the meek did inherit the Earth). But in the tiny world of atoms cause and effect seem to follow different rules of engagement. Matter seems to be spontaneously created and spontaneously vanishes.

It actually gets weirder. Thomas Young did a very famous experiment that most people have no knowledge of. Every physics student or professor does however and the importance of it is that it demonstrates very clearly that as the Bible says, “Rest not on thine own understanding”.

Ask yourself what you think this means. In the early 1800’s Thomas Young, (pretty smart guy who helped decode the Rosetta Stone), did a pretty simple experiment. That experiment and further additions to it put the entire world of physics, and potentially philosophy, on its ear. Or at least it should have.

The experiment calls for a board with two slits in it and a photographic plate behind it. You then shoot light at the first board with the slits. Now since light is a wave it obeys the properties of waves. What happens is the same thing that happens when ocean waves enter a protected

harbor through two openings. What you find in the Harbor is called an interference pattern. It is the result of two waves enhancing each other in some places and canceling each other out in

others. This is what happened on the photographic plate, a pattern of dark and light areas appear. So far everything’s proceeding logically. If you then close one slit you find a diffraction pattern, which is pretty much what you’d find if you were throwing baseballs through the opening, just a bunch of spots where the light particles hit the plate. Notice I say particles. So far this demonstrates something very startling… the duality of light. It acts as both a particle and a wave. Startling, but not yet amazing….. Next the light source is dimmed and one photon (particle) of light at a time is shot at the board. The scientist didn’t know which slit the light went through but what was expected was a pattern much like if you threw baseballs through two holes. There should be one group of spots on the plate behind one slit and another behind the other. That’s not what was found. Over time, as more and more photons were shot at the board, a pattern developed. It was the same interference pattern that would have resulted from the waves, a series of dark and light areas across the plate. Each individual photon evidently knew, even though they were shot one at a time, and therefore could not be canceling each other out, that there were spots it could land in and spots it could not. Even when shooting the light as a particle (one photon at a time) the wave pattern comes up. This is bizarre. Now it gets even more bizarre. You then decide to see which slot each photon goes through and put a particle detector in front of each slot. What happens is the wave pattern Doesn’t form and the baseball pattern emerges. And this occurs not only on the slot that you are watching but the other slot as well. Both slots open, but no interference pattern. What’s different? The scientist merely watched (observed) one of the slits. If you put the particle detector behind the slit so it only sees the photon after it went through the slot, same outcome…. baseball pattern. Not only do the photons act differently as they are being watched the other photons that are not being watched are also reacting differently when they pass through the other slit. Remove the detector from either slit and the wave pattern reemerges. Turn the detector on after the photon begins its journey, the diffraction pattern comes up. The simple act of viewing changes the outcome. And this does not just pertain to light. It pertains to electrons or atoms; the very stuff that we are made up of.

This doesn’t just represent a mystery. It doesn’t represent something that we just don’t have enough information or knowledge to understand. This is a totally different ball game. It demonstrates the total breakdown of the concept of determinism, the cornerstone of normal everyday science at the very basic levels. Let’s put this in the context of an everyday occurrence. You’re driving down the road and the light turns red. It remains red until you look at it. The second you do it turns green. It remains green until you look away. The same thing happens to another stop light one mile away, one you can’t possibly see from where you are. It changes color as you look at or look away from the light that you are stopped at. No one, especially the judge at traffic court would believe this incredible story. Nonetheless it is exactly what happens at the subatomic levels every second of every day.

Okay, let’s move on…..When studying the smallest pieces of the universe, the subatomic world, we cannot pinpoint simultaneously the actual position and the direction of any particle. There’s something called the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principal which states this and proves it mathematically. It states that you can either determine the location or momentum (direction) of a particle but not both at the same time. You can do it with Planets, baseballs or frisbees, but not those quirky electrons. It is indeed a magical mystery tour that we are all on and the more we understand the basic building blocks of the Universe the more mysterious and illogical it becomes.

We have discussed the largest and the smallest aspects of our universe, now let’s meet in the middle. I said earlier that the general understanding of how life began was that it began billions of years ago in what many people refer to as the primordial soup, in effect a swamp filled with chemicals that over time evolved into tiny one celled amoeba. Often, you’ll see this depicted in pictures as an ancient Earth, very hostile environment with erupting volcanoes and vast lightning storms. The lightning is shown hitting the chemical swamp and this is basically the accepted version (but obviously with no proof) of how life began. We watch Dr. Frankenstein hit a conglomeration of dead body parts with lightning in his laboratory, and we laugh and tell the kids not to worry because that’s impossible. We say you can’t make life from dead tissue, but at the same time on another plateau in our minds we believe that you can create life by juicing up a swamp. Actually, early Earth was a pretty sterile version of a “swamp” with few basic elements in existence. You see, we are led to believe that given enough time, through random couplings of these various chemicals, life just eventually starts. Now I don’t have a spiritual problem with the scenario as is widely believed. Interestingly enough, the bible says, the Earth brought forth life. It doesn’t say that God directly brought forth life. But let’s get the facts straight. First of all, there are two big problems with this scenario. To begin with, there’s the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It states that over time entropy increases in a system. Entropy is chaos, the opposite of order. There is no more highly ordered system in the Universe than life. It is incredibly sophisticated. The second problem with the theory is time. Since the Earth is 4.5B years old, it was felt that there could have been enough time for all these chemicals to interact and somehow cause life. No one has ever been able to create life so to assign time to accomplishing something that as far as we know is impossible, really doesn’t make sense. But just for a second let’s assume that life can spontaneously occur given sufficient time. The problem with this is that 4.5B years ago the Earth cooled, and water appears about 700M years later. (By the way no one knows how water formed here). Almost immediately life was formed. Even from a purely mathematical sense there simply could not be enough time for this to happen. Now when you go home and find one of the ottomans raiding the fridge, I may have to eat those words. In fact, regarding this whole idea of self-creation of life, Sir Frederick Hoyle the noted British Astronomer calculated the odds of that happening were in effect the same as the odds of a tornado blowing through a junk yard and leaving a fully functional airplane in its wake. But for the sake of argument let’s say that Life did somehow appear through this random process, (even though we intelligent beings have no clue how to or have ever been able to produce life). So, here’s this amoeba and it hangs around for a month or two, (not being familiar with the life expectancy of an amoeba). Then what happens? It dies. Are we to believe that we wait another couple of billion years and the same thing happens. You see, having something live isn’t enough. You need some way of having that life form thrive and then to reproduce. Reproduction requires DNA, (or at least RNA), and the unbelievably complex process that enables reproduction to occur and to be defined in some logical way. How do you explain that?

What we do know is that something caused life to begin, and it began as one celled bacteria and algae that lived in the oceans. This is also oddly enough consistent with what the Bible says. On the same day, day 3, water and life appear. Again, I find it amazing that people just accept the fact that life spontaneously began. I guess they think that one celled bacterium are pretty simple things so to actually form one and have it live, function, move, protect itself from the environment, nourish itself and then reproduce must be fairly easy. The idea is ludicrous, but let’s examine a fairly simple organism, the E Coli bacteria. We won’t examine its workings just its molecular structure. If you were asked to build a model of an E Coli using plastic beads with a different colored bead for each atom, one would intuit that it would also be a pretty easy process. The fact is, to build this with plastic beads, clicking them together at a rate of one every 5 seconds, working a 40-hour week, you would finish the bacteria in 40 years. That would also assume that you were helped by a staff of 1000 people all working alongside you every hour. All of a sudden, it’s not so simple, is it? An actual E Coli does this job in 30 minutes.

We are then taught that something called evolution took over. Our children are all taught in the schools that humans evolved from these one celled creatures. Now again I don’t have a huge problem with this concept. In my mind if God wanted us to develop from one celled organisms, so be it. The Bible doesn’t say that every phylum of creature, (species are grouped within phyla), was created independently. However, it does say that God created Man from the dust. But once again, let’s get the facts straight. Let’s take a look at Darwin’s famous theory. When we think of

Evolution we think of something called natural selection. The idea behind natural selection is that the life forms that are better able to adapt to the environment have a distinct advantage, and over time this type of life form becomes dominant. The other less adaptable group dies out because it cannot effectively compete. What is not widely understood is the catalyst of these changes. The theory states that random mutations that occur in a life form’s DNA account for these new, improved forms. And it’s not just mutations in any DNA it must occur in the sex chromosomes, the gametes, in order for these mutations to be passed on to the offspring. Natural selection therefore takes an incredibly long time because all mutations can be passed on, and obviously there’s no guarantee that the mutations will result in a better version rather than having a neutral impact or an inferior version, (ie. a giraffe with a shorter neck rather than a longer neck). And statistically the odds are overwhelming that negative attributes will result from random mutations rather than beneficial ones. In Darwin’s famous book, Origin of the Species, he uses the term evolution only once. The last word in the book. He also implores the reader to ignore the evidence and to take his concepts on faith. You see the fossil records do show that a species can adapt and evolve over time but there is absolutely no “credible” evidence in any of millions of fossil records that any species has ever evolved from another. There should be incredible deposits of fossil evidence of these “hybrid creatures” but there are not.

One of the biggest and most obvious issues with Evolution as described by Darwin is that it cannot explain the ridiculously complex organs and processes that allow living things to exist and function. You can apply this concept to almost anything. An eye for example can’t function unless it has every component working in absolute unison for sight to occur. Lose just one piece of the puzzle and the whole thing doesn’t work. The same is true for every organ and every biological process. For example, the process for blood to clot is an incredibly complex process that begins when a cut occurs and clotting is required. The ultimate end result must have the right amount of clotting material allocated. The clot must have a specific strength to counteract a specific pressure. It must clot quickly enough and can’t form where it’s not needed, or the organism dies. Could an organism thrive without this process already in place? Wouldn’t a species die out without just this one absolutely necessary function? Are we to believe that organisms evolve with this and every other process required by random accident? Another example is the mechanisms an organism must use to survive or stave off predators. Let’s look at the bombardier beetle. It squirts a boiling hot liquid at its enemies. To do this, special structures make extremely concentrated forms of two chemicals, hydrogen peroxide and hydroquinone. The mixture is sent to a special holding chamber which is sealed off from a seperate explosion chamber. A sphincter muscle separates the two chambers. In the explosion chamber there are ectodermal glands that secrete an enzyme catalyst into the mixture. The hydrogen peroxide breaks down into water and oxygen. The oxygen reacts with the hydroquinone. These reactions create heat which causes steam to form thereby allowing the beetle to direct it through an aperture to the unsuspecting enemy. Do you think that all of this was created accidently? If it formed gradually by random steps what would happen to the beetles that had everything except the last escape valve? Answer: Dead beetles. These processes, functions, organs are all formed in a manner that is irreducibly complex. That means unless every piece of the puzzle is in place, not only does the thing not work, but it also probably kills the host.

Think about it. Evolutionists believe that birds descended “accidently” from lizards or mammals. For a land animal to develop wings what would be necessary? Can you imagine a buffalo with feathers? The feathers wouldn’t do anything for the buffalo except make him the laughingstock of the rest of the herd. According to evolution wings don’t just appear one day. The steps needed at a very high level would first require the animal’s bone structure to be changed significantly. It would have to be formed so that it could support the great strength of external wings. Then the external appendages would have to be formed and lastly feathers so it could finally fly. The point is, according to Darwin’s own theory all of these mutations that would have ultimately led to apparatus that would enable flight would have made the animal less able to survive until the end of that evolutionary process. No animal would have been able to last that long. Let’s look at the facts. The fossil records paint a very clear picture, and it seems that the gradual and systematic evolutionary journey that Darwin predicted has absolutely no resemblance to reality. The Earth cools 4.5B years ago and water forms 3.8B years ago. Almost immediately, life in the form of one celled bacteria and algae form. That’s the way things remained for about the next 3.3B years until 530M years ago, a time we call the Cambrian period. At that time, we find evidence of a vast amount of complex life forms. Animals with gills, eyes, legs, etc. all appear at once. Why is this a problem? Because the random mutations that Darwin relies on should follow a gradual statistical model that would demonstrate changes occurring over a great deal of time in a very predictable pattern. If we view the entire history of the Earth condensed to a period of one year, from January first until mid-November there was almost no change to the organisms (the one celled bacteria and algae) residing on our planet. The first vertebrates didn’t appear until 11/21. Primates came on the scene on 12/26. Homo Sapiens at three and a half minutes before midnight on New Year’s Eve. In other words, for the vast majority of our history life remained unchanged until one point when everything started to appear at once. How would this scientific evidence match Darwin’s model? It doesn’t.

Another Darwinian concept is that with evolution the more advanced organism survives, and the old form can’t compete and dies out. Guess what? One celled bacteria and algae are still the most predominant forms of life on our planet today. They certainly did not suffer or die out as Evolution would have you believe.

How does Evolution Theory explain how males and females both evolved independently from a one celled organism. I shudder to think of the mistakes before somehow “accidently” unique and separate men and women were formed. And by the way, how did we reproduce in mammal form before separate and unique men and women existed?

So where do our educators get off teaching evolution as anything other than what it is, a theory. A good theory, an accurate theory in many ways but also a totally incomplete theory. Incomplete because it doesn’t adequately explain the open issues. If you are going to teach Evolution as fact then you must also discuss the gaps. They cannot just be totally ignored. And you must admit the fundamental ramification; that the cornerstone of Darwin’s theory states that human beings formed by accident. In essence, we are a mistake, a random eventuality. Can’t just gloss over that one can we? Doesn’t it make absolute scientific sense to at least consider the need for some master blueprint to adequately explain the progress of everything that we have been talking about? If you want to seek enlightenment, then seek enlightenment. To me, continuing to teach evolution incompletely is burying your head in the sand. Is it enlightenment only when something seems to contradict spirituality?

Let’s look at another very interesting example. Many people point out the DNA “evidence” that proves evolution. The evidence points out a 94 to 97% similarity between humans and great apes. Interestingly there is a similar spread between humans and other humans. But to put this “evidence” in perspective let’s review the development of the eye. It seems that the gene that governs this development in vertebrates, the Pax –6, has a similar gene that does it in the other phyla as well. The molecular similarity in the eye in all Phyla is astounding. Whether it’s in mollusks, insects, or flat worms. There’s a 94% match in this genetic blueprint between insects and humans. Optical apparatus could take any path and still deliver sight to a living creature. The odds of 5 genetically separate phyla evolving this way by chance are 10 to the 170th power to the 5th power. This is “twice” the odds of a monkey striking random keys on a keyboard and after a couple of days you look down and discover that Bonzo perfectly typed a Shakespearean Sonnet. The fact that all eyes are so genetically similar could only be true according to Darwin if they came from a common ancestor. The trouble with this is that the only common ancestor for all of these phyla is pre-Cambrian. Remember, that was a time that only contained one celled algae and bacteria. Neither could see. So why would they contain a gene that would someday be developed for sight. (By the way, during Darwin’s time there was no knowledge of atomic structure and the inner workings of the cell so his theories did not consider these critical elements).

The only other possibility is that there is an external design and therefore a designer that provides a purposeful direction. And we, ourselves, our planet, our universe, the pieces that make up all these things, all are set in motion in a magical mystery tour, some of which we can understand, much of which we cannot.

So, let’s say that you are out hiking in the foothills with the head of the school board in the town where you live and you tell him everything that you just read in this paper. You look at him when you’re finished and ask him if you’ve made sufficient points for him to reconsider teaching evolution and the creation of the universe as facts without at least providing “all” of the facts and allowing a constructive open discussion in the classrooms. He looks at you like you’re speaking Mandarin and says, of course not. Suddenly you both hear a loud noise and see a cloud of dust coming from around the next bend. You race over and see that a boulder had fallen over revealing an opening in the rocks behind it. It’s a cave. You both enter and can see that on the cave walls there are stick figures. Some look to be a large herd of antelope and others seem to be men holding spears with some riding animals (horses). The head of the school board is beside himself. “This is amazing!” he shouts out. “Look at the cave drawings! I bet that we’re the first humans to see them since they were originally painted by cave men.” You look over at him and say, “What are you talking about?” He looks at you with an incredulous look and replies, “These cave drawings. That’s what I’m talking about.” You then seize the opportunity and say, “How do you know they’re cave drawings. They might just be the natural result of clay that oozed between cracks in the cave wall that formed these images.” He shakes his head and says, “You’re crazy. There’s no way this happened by accident. They are obviously drawings made by someone depicting an ancient hunt.”

Checkmate. You then smile at him and say, “So what you’re telling me is that there’s no way that these stick figures are an accident but you and I, living creatures with unbelievably complex circulatory, digestive, endocrine, immune, lymphatic, muscular, nervous, respiratory, skeletal, urinary and excretory systems all working in unbelievably complex ways, all somehow directed by an unknown master communication system to function, and all working in perfect harmony with each other and all requiring one more system, a reproductive system, for us to be able to reproduce…. We are random mistakes. Right?”

So, let’s review some of the things that we talked about. We talked about the unbelievably astronomical odds of this Universe, one within an endless list of so many possibilities that could not support any possible life form to exist.

We then showed the ridiculous chain of lotteries that had to be won for life to exist within that amazingly unique universe. We showed that the basic building blocks of everything, the spooky quantum world, doesn’t just live by a separate set of rules that anything else. In many cases it acts without explainable rules at all. We showed the eerily accurate description of creation by Genesis, a book written over 3,000 years ago. Day one, let there be light; day 3 water and dry ground on our planet and the first life; day 5, abundant creatures swimming in the oceans and winged insects; day 6, land animals and man. We looked at the unbelievable complexity of a human being, and the fact that not only would 530M years not be anywhere close to being enough time to somehow evolve that complexity IF it were possible at all, especially since our understanding of nature is based on Entropy that states that over that period, the natural order is for things to become more chaotic, not more ordered. We looked at irreducibly complex scenarios that are evident in every aspect of life and living things.

Let’s look at one other area. There are a lot of pretty interesting philosophies regarding how we view ourselves as conscious beings. There’s a healthy argument on whether the brain and the mind are two separate things or not. In other words, the thing that makes you really you, the thing that I call a self-awareness is separate from the physical grey matter that does all those intricate things that allow us to function. Let’s take a quick look at the brain. At the base is the stem which regulates the basic functions like heartbeat and breathing. Above that is the R Complex layer. They call it the reptilian brain. It provides aggression, territoriality, greed, flight, or fight. When you get angry or scared and your adrenaline starts pumping that’s the part of your brain equipping you for survival. Above it is the limbic layer. Here we find emotions, and lusts, and then comes the cerebral cortex, (outer most part of the brain), where the higher functions are located. Critical analysis, the database, language all resides here. And the specific areas of these higher cognitive functions are located in either the left or right hemisphere. On the left there’s words, speech, and sequential perceptions. On the right there’s simultaneous processing, relationships and images. Its structure has provided easy analogies between the brain and a computer, the hard drive, the operating system layers, the applications, and the memory. But the analogies end when you come to thinking as opposed to processing, and most importantly being aware of oneself. Identical twins have the same DNA, as do Siamese twins. So, their organs, including their brains, although separate, are engineered to be the same. The self-awareness of these two people, however, are totally separate. They can have common personality traits, but when one has a thought, it’s their thought, an unshared thought. The French philosopher Descartes said, Cogito ergo sum. I think, therefore I am. What I’d like you to consider is what I call the Theory of YOU. Unbelievably, it’s not a question we ever hear about. The normal questions are how did the Universe begin, how did life begin and how did humans begin. We spoke about all of these but what’s remaining is why are YOU here? It’s a question that does not consider any global issues regarding the human species as a whole. It focuses on one thing, YOU. It says that the fact that YOU are here proves the existence of GOD. Not the fact that I’m here, your grandmother, your sister or the lady down the street. Relative to you, we are just life forms that are here because life exists in this Universe. But YOU are a totally different story. Why are YOU one of these self-awareness’s? Here’s another way of looking at it. Any self-awareness is either, one of an infinite number of self-awareness’, or one of a finite number of self-awareness’. If you are one of an infinite number of self-awareness’ then the odds of YOU being here makes every other statistic that we discussed seem trivial. Being here is like you and I picking the same number of an infinite number of numbers that would not only need a piece of paper that goes from one end of the visible Universe to the other, (20B light years away), but a piece of paper that goes back and forth across those 20B light years endlessly. There are no odds, no analogies that can describe it. It is essentially impossible that you are here if you are one of an infinite number of choices unless someone/something/some entity determined that you should be here. Whether that is for a hundred years or an hour, it makes no difference. Time, as we already discussed is irrelevant to HIM. Now on the other hand, if YOU are one of a finite number of self-awareness’, then it is certainly logical that you are here. But what or who made it so there were only a finite number to begin with? Can you guess? Either way, YOU represent absolute, irrefutable proof of GOD. God is needed either way!

This narrative was meant to be enlightening. For you to perceive this Universe where we live, this Planet that we live on, this body that we inhabit, the tiny particles that makes up everything, the ideas and theories that we have come to believe as absolute truth, as they truly are. I tried to show you that a belief in a Supreme Being should not be a stretch of common sense, an obstruction to Scientific Reasoning or a roadblock to enlightenment. It should be as I hope we have all seen, just the opposite. The only rational explanation to everything that we have discussed. So where do we go from here? This knowledge combined with Faith is a very powerful entity. It puts us in a position where we must truly search our minds, hearts and souls for the real meaning of our own lives. Why did the LORD, GOD, ALLAH, JEHOVA, put us here? Not generally but specifically. Why go to all this trouble? For what? What’s his plan for you? Why give you the free will to determine how you will treat this experience? What do you do with this GOD given opportunity? Think about it. Pray about it. Thanks for reading.

Dean D’Adamo