There are a lot of links, and I recommend taking the time to watch them. Having a little trouble formatting the links for Faithlife, but it is also on FBC Apologetics on Facebook.
I didn’t include the super dry video explaining what amino acids are.
This class attacks Darwin’s guess of how life might have started…
What is the goal of this class? Not just today, but the whole class?
To convince us mortals that we have value. So much value that God loves us, and that Jesus died in our place.
And that we are made in God’s image, and He has a plan for our lives: we have amazing value.
So I think that God is good. Doesn’t everyone? What would it take to convince someone that God is good, and that He loves us, and that we are actually made in His image?
Well, for one thing, you have to believe in God first, right?
What are we told almost every day about where we came from? Sometimes it is easy to miss it, but it is the main message in just about every area of our lives, and that is that WE EVOLVED.
What does the Bible say about where/how we came from? God created us.
What does Darwinian evolution say? Random mutations based on natural selection. No need for God. No need for God?
What are the implications when you have no god? No foundation for ethics, since natural selection, means survival of the fittest, and if we are weak in this dog-eat-dog world, then the mighty don’t care about the weak. It also means that there is no meaning in life, and if we are just chemical reactions, then we have no freedom of choice. (Prof. William Provine of Cornell)
The goal of the class is to show that there is only one plausible explanation of how we got here, and if God actually did create us, then there is hope, and all those desperate people without hope don’t have to end it all. Suicide is nearing an epidemic.
If God didn’t create us, how did we get here? Evolution talks about changes in existing species. But Darwin’s book wasn’t titled “how species change over time”, but it was titled “The Origin of Species”. There is no way that Darwin could have known about the complexity of the cell. But we know better now, but almost all the academics still hold to the lie.
Did you hear about the $10 million dollar prize to the first person who can prove how life started, and how the genetic information got into DNA? It was on Breakpoint. The point is that nobody knows how life started, and evolution has so many holes in it, that they are reaching for another explanation of how life started.
https://uncommondescent.com/.../probability-of-a-single.../
In case you didn’t catch it, the chances of forming a single strand of protein 150 amino acids long in just the right order to form a specific function is 10^167. That’s one in ten with 167 zeros behind it.
The time to make that one protein by chance is 4.6 billion years, and that is if all the puddles on earth were working at it at the same time at a rate of 100 billion tries every second. What?! And that’s just one protein! There are 42 million proteins in just one cell. The average age of a protein before it dies and needs replacing? Measured in hours, sometimes days (or longer for super complex proteins like the ones in your eyes).
We watched a 3-minute video which is a really cool animation of the life of the cell, made by Harvard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJyUtbn0O5Y
I also will include the long version, which has all the medical terminology. Remember: all those things you see on the screen are proteins forming very specific roles.
The scientific community is using 170-year-old science to try and explain the origin of life and has refused to entertain the other option on the table, namely creation.
Here is the longer version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzcTgrxMzZk
Back 100 years ago, they used to say anything was possible, given enough time. Back then they thought the universe was eternal. With the help of Edwin Hubble and Albert Einstein, they discovered that the universe did actually have a beginning, so there is not enough time for any random protein-making to construct a very precise molecular machine to form only one function in a cell.
You can read this excerpt from the Breakpoint broadcast, or listen to the full version with the link.
https://breakpoint.org/turning-chemicals-into-code/...
Back in January, at a meeting held at the Royal Society in London, a team of scientists and investors announced the largest prize ever offered to solve a scientific mystery. Organized by engineer and business consultant Perry Marshall, the whopping prize of $10 million (ten times the Nobel Prize payout) will be given to any person or team who can “arrange for a digital communication system to emerge or self-evolve without…explicitly designing the system.” The point of the contest is to learn where the genetic code came from and how it became the basis for all life.
The winning experiment, according to their website, “must generate an encoder that sends digital code to a decoder,” and transmit at least five bits of information or roughly half as much as a comparable segment of DNA. In other words, to claim the prize, you must bring into existence the functional equivalent of the first living cell, without intelligently designing the system.
The prize is so big because evolution “leaves two things completely unexplained: How did life get going in the first place, and what is the origin of the genetic code.”
With refreshing honesty, he continued, “I cannot see personally how DNA could have been there at the beginning. After all, it requires the cell to enable it and to reproduce, and it requires the cell also to correct errors in that reproduction and replication process.”
Perry Marshall explained why he organized the prize by recalling a debate about the origin of life he once had with his brother. Sons of a pastor, Marshall offered a standard argument from design, but his brother retorted that natural processes were sufficient to explain all of life’s complexity.
Marshall wasn’t convinced. As he was writing what would later become his bestselling book on computer networks, he realized that “mathematically [DNA and ethernet] are identical. It’s encoding and decoding. It is a communication system…Genetics is digital communication.”
Intelligent design theorists have argued that information, like what is stored and communicated in DNA, has only one known source – an intelligent agent. To produce a system like DNA through unguided processes would not only be to do something that’s never been done; it would be to do something never before observed in the history of science.
But, it gets even worse for those hoping to snag that $10 million. As Dr. Noble reminded press and colleagues, DNA requires a cell to function…and cells, as far as we know, require DNA. To get one, you need the other. In other words, to win the money, competitors must not only put together the equivalent of functioning genetic code “without cheating,” they have to create the molecular machines that use, replicate, and edit that code.
The bottom line? The origin of life and of the information that makes it possible remains the most significant challenge to a naturalistic worldview. The only plausible explanation for how these incredible systems came into being is intelligent design, precisely what those competing for this prize are forbidden from using.
Don’t get me wrong. $10 million is a lot of money, but, it’s still not enough to make the impossible possible.
