Blog

by Steve Risner

Design is something anyone can see has taken place, especially if the object of our attention is exceptionally complex. The more sophisticated and complex a thing is, the more easily we can determine if it was designed. Something that was designed would necessarily have someone or something that designed it—a Designer. Whether it's a spoon, a satellite, a robot, or a frog, there are hallmarks of design that are frequently not difficult to notice. I've written in the past on the Hallmarks of Design. I feel the idea is worth revisiting.

Design is something that often a child can identify. In the above linked blog post, I mention an arrow head—a rock that has been roughly shaped for a purpose—is something so lacking in complexity and sophistication but is still so clearly designed. Only a person devoted mindlessly to their philosophy, in my humble opinion, could look at something like a cell and the amazing world within, an eye, an ear, a nose, a strand of DNA, the human brain, or the hand and suggest it wasn't designed. To be fair, the “mindless person” in question could just be fooling himself. But this is even worse, is it not? If a person is so intent on believing something that they know is false or if they cannot acknowledge any information that suggests their belief may be false, that person is not honest and is lying to himself as well as anyone he would discuss such things with. The atheist must hold on to ideas that are absolutely contrary to his belief system in order to uphold his belief system. The atheist believes in miracles, actually, but he would never admit that. I need to move on before I get carried away concerning atheists and their absolute need for miracles. Perhaps that's another blog post subject.

Rather than say a lot of stuff others have said on the subject of the obviousness of design in nature—i.e. the essential nature of a Designer for life to exist—I'll just quote a few people.

We'll start with something Richard Dawkins said because it perfectly shows the need for the atheist to defy his own logic and mistrust his own ability to think rationally so he can hold on to his irrational belief that there is no Designer. Mr. Dawkins says, “Biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose.” He will go on to say that to believe in such an idea, that life was designed and did not evolve from non-living chemistry that eventually morphed into every type of living thing we see today, means you're stupid, insane or evil. The contradictions are amazing.

Another unreasonable statement is by Daniel Dennett. He says, “Wherever there is a design that is highly successful in a broad range of similar environments, it is apt to emerge again and again, independently - the phenomenon known in biology as convergent evolution. I call these designs 'good tricks.'” He believes that design is the result of an accident and even uses the word “design” to describe things he doesn't believe are designed. He would suggest the 40 different parts necessary for a bacterium to operate a flagellum (a tail that gives it the ability to propel itself) was accidental and occurred over time. But this is literally impossible and defies common sense. If any of these parts are not working, the thing doesn't work. It would be necessary for all of these parts to accidentally be brought together at the same time and in the right configuration for this little “motor” to work. If they evolved independently, there would be no need for them to remain in the genetic code for that bacterium and would likely disappear, especially when we consider 40 different parts! For me, this is totally nonsensical and, again, demonstrates the lengths atheists will go to hold on to their origins myth. They will pull some smoke and mirror nonsense about how the parts may have come about individually, but this is wishful thinking. There's no sense in beating their failed attempts at explaining it to death. My hope is we can all understand that this one thing (which is not very complex in the grand scheme of things) cannot have come about through some blind, mindless, uncoordinated process.

Then we have interesting comments concerning the computer-like workings of the brain and of DNA. Ray Kurzweil said, “Biology is a software process. Our bodies are made up of trillions of cells, each governed by this process. You and I are walking around with outdated software running in our bodies, which evolved in a very different era.” What's hilarious is that he states the software is outdated! Far superior to any man made software, but it's outdated? Really? Nearly 10 years ago, the prediction was that by 2030, we may be able to make a computer that rivals the brain! I believe this prediction is incorrect now as they are suggesting the technology has advanced even faster than they predicted. But think of it! We're only now beginning to be able to approach the abilities of the human brain. Now, let's take a look at this marvelous thing. The brain is allegedly an accidentally manufactured super computer that man is now, possibly in the next 10 years, going to be able to duplicate in its computing power. Does the naivety of that seem as obvious to you as it does to me? Essentially, the idea is “Mother Nature” created a super computer without wanting to and having no idea how to. Saying “Mother Nature” did it is akin to saying the thing invented itself. The fact that many of the men and women who believe this stuff are exceptional thinkers blows my mind even more.

The huge elephant in the room that I've tried to dance around in all of the blog posts I've written on this subject is simply this: how can anyone suspend their intellect long enough to suppose that something so naive and so obviously counter intuitive happened, and it happened accidentally by random, natural processes? Super computers that run on an extremely low amount of wattage (far less than a laptop) don't spring into existence by themselves, and they don't form from the dirt. They require planning and great amounts of knowledge to produce.

This is further evidenced by a a statement made by Bill Gates: “DNA is like a computer program but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.” DNA is a super computer that's found in every cell of the body and has within it the instructions to build the super computer we call the brain. Bill Gates is saying the software is far beyond anything we've ever produced. Ray Kurzweil is suggesting the software is outdated. Interesting, isn't it? We get these sorts of contradictory statements from people musing over things they know very little about. I say this not to insinuate that they are not intelligent or don't have the information. I say this because none of us has any idea how this stuff works. It's that complex. In man's arrogance, he will believe he's got it figured out, but it seems rather obvious that this is nonsense.

To add to the absurdity, Richard Dawkins went on to say, “I'm fascinated by the idea that genetics is digital. A gene is a long sequence of coded letters, like computer information. Modern biology is becoming very much a branch of information technology.” The idea that DNA—your genes—is coded has long been assumed by nearly everyone involved. But a code, by definition, must be generated and deciphered by an intelligence. A code doesn't just randomly pop into existence, only to be decoded by something else that randomly popped into existence. And in this particular instance, we're talking about a coded message containing instructions on how to build and maintain the most complex machines in the known universe. Now, to me, it seems rather comical to think this coded information that turns two gametes (sperm and egg cells) into Einstein or Newton and also can turn carrots or animal flesh or whatever else we eat into usable proteins and energy came about accidentally by random, natural processes. What do you think? Does that seem like a strange fiction or fairy tale?

Consider it like this: someone tries to tell you your car or your computer or smart phone was not built by someone. They want you to believe it was the product of natural processes that had no mind or idea what they were doing—it wasn't planned. Over the years, through a series of quadrillions of fortunate accidents, nature was lucky enough to build something like your car. But to be fair, in comparison to all the sophistication and complexity of the human body—from DNA and organelles to cells to all the sensory and internal organs and, finally, the brain—your car is like a polished rock. Not really that impressive. In fact, the most complicated and intricate work man has done is nothing when held up to the standard set forth by life. Living things are truly miraculous and accomplish amazing things. Praise God for His immense diversity in His creation and the amazing workmanship that He displays.

In my next blog post, we'll take a look at a few more interesting comments by evolutionists and intellgient design advocates. Many of them fantastically expose the obtuse nature of the evolutionist's origins myth. It's remarkable. I think it is, anyway. I hope you can see just how silly the “theory” is.

This forum is meant to foster discussion and allow for differing viewpoints to be explored with equal and respectful consideration.  All comments are moderated and any foul language or threatening/abusive comments will not be approved.  Users who engage in threatening or abusive comments which are physically harmful in nature will be reported to the authorities.