Intelligent Design Gets Thumbs Up

Imagine finding a planet where robots are programmed so that they can make other robots just like themselves from raw materials.

Now, imagine an alien scientist visitor coming to the planet and, after many years of studying these robots, the alien scientist visitor comes to the conclusion that since science can explain how these robots work, operate, function, and reproduce there’s no reason to believe that there was an ultimate intelligent designer behind them.

The analogy above certainly is not perfect but it is sufficient to reveal the fallacious thinking of those who attack intelligent design behind life and the universe.

Image by Chris Dichtel, Silicon Valley Graphic Artist

Of course, once there is a complete and living cell then the genetic program and complex biological mechanisms exist to direct the formation of more cells. The question is how could life or the cell come into existence naturally when there was no directing mechanism in nature.

Intelligent Design theory does not oppose natural laws but simply states that mere undirected natural laws can never account for the high complexity found in life and the universe.

Chance physical processes can produce some level of order but it is not rational to believe that the highest levels of order in life and the universe are by chance. For example, some amino acids have been shown to be able to come into existence by chance but not more complex molecules or structures such as proteins which require that the various amino acids be in a precise sequence, just like the letters in a sentence. If they’re not in the right sequence the protein molecules will not function. A single cell alone has millions of protein molecules!

There is no innate chemical tendency for the various amino acids to bond with one another in a sequence. Any one amino acid can just as easily bond with any other. The only reason at all for why the various amino acids bond with one another in a precise sequence in the cells of our bodies is because they’re directed to do so by an already existing sequence of molecules in our genetic code. Without being in a proper sequence protein molecules will not function.

The sequence of molecules in DNA (the genetic code) determines the sequence of molecules in proteins. Furthermore, without DNA there cannot be RNA, and without RNA there cannot be DNA. And without either DNA or RNA there cannot be proteins, and without proteins there cannot be DNA or RNA. They’re all mutually dependent upon each other for existence! None of these molecules can “survive” or replicate outside of a complete and living cell. This simply means that DNA ,RNA , and proteins could never have gradually evolved waiting supposedly through hundreds of millions of years to become a complete cell.

4 comments to Intelligent Design Gets Thumbs Up

  • This was really good. It reminds me of a couple of analogies I once heard concerning the "organization of the world" as I like to call it.

    If you see a messy room and leave and come back to find it cleaned up, would you not assume that someone came by and organized everything? Rationally you would.

    Also, if you have all of the pieces of a rolex watch in a bag and shake it up, what are the chances that you could shake it into a perfectly operating rolex watch?

    Again, the complexity and perfection of the universe, planets, and even our bodies are a result of organization from a higher intelligence. I personally refer to this being as Heavenly Father, and I have a testimony born of the Holy Spirit that He lives and loves us.

  • Chris Dichtel

     I am commenting here to remind you that even though your re-use of my illustration (originally created for the Silicon Valley Watcher, http://www.siliconvalleywatcher.com/mt/archives/2… is allowed under the Creative Commons license employed by the owner of that site, that very license requires you to give proper attribution to the images you use. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/.

    Seeing as how there is no such attribution here, you are essentially violating that license, as well as the commonly agreed upon ethics of the internet. For an example of this very same illustration being properly attributed on another site, see this one: http://beanstalkbiz.blogspot.com/2007/10/attentio… (although, really, best practice is to put the acknowldgement right below the image, not at the end of the article).

    There is a good article on the ethics of all this to be found at: http://www.designsponge.com/2011/02/biz-ladies-ph… and an excerpt therefrom:
    "The bottom line on ethics? Here are some best practices that must become a standard:
        * Credit the photographer and source. Provide the photographer name/magazine name, company or publication (This must be written under the image, not just a link when you click on the image.)
        * Link to both the photographer and the source."

    Even though Tom Foremski's site, the Silicon Valley Watcher, operates under a Creative Commons license, these were still paid illustrational jobs for me, and a part of my commercial portfolio. (http://cdichtel.net/slideshowSVW.html) I would be grateful, therefor, if you would provide that acknowledgement, however tardy, on your usage of my illustration as seen here.

    Sincerely,
    Chris Dichtel

  • sanwatson

    Thanks for contributing your important time to post such an interesting & useful collection about minneapolis web designer.It would be knowledgeable & resources are always of great need to everyone. Please keep continue sharing.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  


*

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

sharethis_button(); }?>