The Universe and Life?

[ooojerry]

My Essay as a freshman in high school(last year) on my beliefs of how we came to be. I honestly think that there is a higher being(s) of some sort. But I do believe in both scientific and Christian aspects of our universe. Feel free to bash this as much as you want to. I got a 200/200 on it!

Unlocking the Mystery of Life

A question we have all asked ourselves; how did life begin and how was it created. There are numerous theories from the Big Bang, evolution, intelligent design, creationism and the list goes on and on. Each theory has its valid points and with those valid points there are gray areas within the theory itself. I believe that the scientific evidence best supports is the theory of intelligent design. I believe that intelligent design is the answer to how we came to be. As Francesco Redi had concluded on his experiment of spontaneous generation, “Life cannot arise from non-living matter.” This plagues the theory of evolution on how the first forms of life could have been developed. Though intelligent design there is the use of a creator; it could be a god, an alien, or any form of a higher being to install life and its functions.

The scientific evidence best supports the creation of the universe through the Big Bang theory. Where the universe at one time was a super-hot and super-dense mass and then with a massive explosion expanded outward. Physicists have applied physical laws to the Big Bang theory and it is the steadiest theory for the creation of the universe. Scientists have also concluded through the Big Bang that the universe will continue to expand until it has become too dense to support itself and then will collapse and form into a super-hot and super-dense mass and continue through this cycle through eternity. Because of the Big Bang the first atomic elements were created. These elements through nuclear fusion in stars created more elements when these massive stars produced supernovae creating the building block of life, carbon. This allowed for the diversity of elements in the common universe. Eventually, the right conditions had occurred allowing for the massive cool down of the Earth and allowing for life forms to develop.

There are various arguments in science how the first life had been created. Stanley Miller and Harold Urey had created an experiment through which they had composed amino acids. A mixture of gases simulating the atmosphere of early Earth (these gases were not the gases present on early Earth) were present in the experiment. They had also incorporated sparks to simulate lightening storms and allowed the gases along with water vapor to cool and become liquid where when the mixture had gotten to the bottom of the tubing dripped out a spout into a beaker. In the beaker Miler and Urey had found amino acids which are essential in making proteins. From this stew of amino acids and other simple molecules it is hypothesized that proteinoid microspheres were created. These microspheres have selectively permeable membranes and they have some characteristics of living systems. This could be the basic building blocks for life because it is very similar to a cell with functioning organelles.

The jump from prokaryotic organisms to eukaryotic organisms is huge. The best-known theory for this jump from simple cells to complex cells is the endosymbiotic theory. The theory in general states that aerobic bacteria inserted itself into an anaerobic prokaryote and the aerobic bacteria became mitochondria. Then from that stage they could become non-plant life eukaryotes. To become a photosynthetic eukaryote photosynthetic bacterium would insert itself with the mitochondrion forming plant-like eukaryotes. This theory is highly unlikely due to the fact, supposedly cell membranes were in existence and the odds of a bacteria invading a prokaryote and embedding itself into the prokaryote and changing its DNA to produce similar offspring is highly unlikely.

Evolution is the most widely accepted theory of proving that life today had evolved from one common ancestor. Darwin explains that through natural selection organisms can grow adaptations to better suit them for their environment. As this would allow for these eukaryotic cells to change and evolve and become better adapted to their environments as if they were in a struggle for survival. He observed this while he was traveling the world on the HMS Beagle. His strongest example was in the Galápagos Islands. He had observed more than thirteen types of finches in the Galápagos. Each finch with similar characteristics; while each finch also had their own unique adaptations which were suited for their habitat. With beaks ranging in size from long, thin beaks to short, thick beaks; each with their own special adaptations. He concluded that that these birds had a common ancestor. In Darwin’s theory there is a flaw. Most mutations are detrimental; meaning that if a mutation occurs then it is usually deadly. Then, the odds of having two mates of the same species with the same genetic mutation breeding are highly unlikely. In Darwin’s case he says that through natural selection all advantageous adaptations are kept and passed on to the next generation.

Darwin had also gone on to say that all life (every organism ever created) descended from one ancient organism. Darwin had stated in his The Origin of Species, "Authors of the highest eminence seem to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death of the individual.” Darwin is questioning how everything could be created without a creator to start life. The term evolution means gradual change over time. In evolution, there were bouts of microevolution and macroevolution. If macroevolution did occur it does not fit the term of evolution because it creates a whole different species unrelated to its original species. Also, each mutation which would cause a microevolution or a macroevolution would probably kill the organism because random mutations are normally detrimental. This is observed every day, for example, babies are sometimes born with holes in their hearts which is fatal in every case because the mutation that had occurred had been detrimental.

Darwin also does not explain how complex organs such as an eye or a heart could develop slowly over time because if you were to remove part of the eye or heart they would not function properly. As Darwin had written in his The Origin of Species, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case." This is where intelligent design proves to be the best theory of the origin of species.

Intelligent design, is Michael Behe’s, theory of irreducibly complex. Irreducibly complex is something that cannot function if it was missing a part. He had written about intelligent design in his book, Darwin’s Black Box. He had questioned Darwin’s theory of natural selection and how certain organ structures could function if they had not already been placed in the organism itself. Behe stated that there is a higher being in his book. Whether it be God, or even aliens. Something that was intelligent designed life on Earth. This had left the door open to theories on the creation of the universe, but had also if God was the creator to follow a route that is similar to Genesis as everything was created step by step over time.
We are not here to ask who created a power but what had created us and the universe in the first place. Intelligent design fills in the gaps that the theory of evolution had left out. Intelligent design states that their is a higher power that had created the universe as it is and modifies it. "This most beautiful system of the sun, planets and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being." Newton is stating that there a higher power had created everything. This creator does not have to be God, a series of gods, or anything religious. It also states that the higher power created the first organisms on Earth and allowed them to do as they pleased before changing them and essentially toying with them. The changing of an organism is the base of evolution, but the higher power could allow that organism to change to become more adapted and well-suited immediately instead of over long periods of time which has been stated by supporters of evolution through means of natural selection. While supporters of evolution have also left out how did life arise from elements into compounds, then into proteins, then into a living functioning cell. Irreducible complexity states that the creator had given those organisms what they had needed to survive structurally. This would explain how a heart could have developed; it was placed their by a higher power. While Darwinian supporters cannot come up with how a functioning heart could arise slowly over time. The bacterial flagellum is another crucial example of irreducible complexity. That bacterial flagellum has over forty different parts that make up the bacterial flagellum allowing it to move. Darwinian activists cannot explain how a complex machine such as the bacterial flagellum could arise from natural selection.

[ooojerry]

William Dembski formulated the universal probability bound; he stated that the creation of the universe and the life that has been created is a “1 in 10^120 and the variable rank complexity of the event under consideration.” Dembski’s main goal was to prove that the odds of having all those reactions occur at the right times in the right order is highly unlikely. In terms of numbers the odds of that is one in novemtrigintillion of the reactions occurring in the right order successfully to create life under Darwinian thought. Mathematically a creator makes sense. That a higher form established the universe and what we know of it.

In Darwin’s Black Box, Behe referred “to certain complex biochemical cellular systems. He posits that evolutionary mechanisms cannot explain the development of such "irreducibly complex" systems.” Behe’s most famous and basic example for irreducible complexity is a mouse trap. A mouse trap consists of a catch, a base, a hammer, and a spring. All of these parts are integral for the mouse trap to work. If you even removed one part the mouse trap would not function and would be useless in its goal of catching mice. Another example of irreducible complexity is the blood clotting cascade which coagulates blood. For blood to clot it needs all of its “parts.” If anyone of these parts were to be missing blood would not coagulate. In Behe’s theory this means that blood clotting is irreducibly complex and could not develop through natural selection otherwise organisms would bleed too death from a little scrape.

The eye is one of the most complex organs in the body. If your eye is missing your retina you cannot see, and if your eye is missing its lens you cannot see. If you are missing any part of your eye you cannot see. Darwin had stated in The Origin of Species "to suppose that the eye... could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree." Even Darwin had doubts of his own theory if it were to be questioned and proved that the eye or another organ and or organ system can be irreducibly complex that he said, “My theory would absolutely break down.”

Irreducible complexity exemplifies the need for a creator to create complex biological systems so that life can grow and prosper. This is why I believe that the scientific evidence best supports irreducible complexity. With time Darwin’s theory of evolution through means of natural selection has began to crumble due to new evidence against it. Such as the odds of everything occurring in the first place one in a novemtrigintillion. If irreducible complexity is the answer for how life became to be; then how was the creator created. Could it have been an alien on the far reaches of space that we have no knowledge of yet? Or, could it be that there is a Holy God out there watching our every movement and providing us with the adaptations we need to survive and prosper on Earth.


Figures I spammed over 10,000 characters to make two posts

[Atrus]

Too late now -- too tired to respond, but I'll return. For now this is a thoughtful post, from the heart, but supported with enough information to make it work. Good stuff. 200/200

~A

[CarloGiann]

tl;dr

Will read 2morrow.

[XTR3M3]

Nice job Jerry. It looked at both sides and was very constructive. I think I have a statistically better chance of being struck by lightning once a day for a year then life starting from non-living material in some random event...IDK, maybe I will figure out the exact math on that factoring in my geographical location with its relationship to lightning strike frequency. Sounds like a fun excersise.

Again, nice posts.

[weaver]

What are your chances of getting struck once a day for a year, XTR3M3?

In all of this long time the universe has existed.. and all the places you can be... what are the chances of it happening at least /once/ ..

I would say it's guaranteed to happen.

[Insomnia]

I like to think that the big bang was the "let there be light part". But for the world to exist out of nothing? i mean what are you serious? Get a shoe box and seal it as tight as possible and come back 10 years later to it... i am willing to bet you not even dust is inside of it if you sealed it tight!

And Jerry... i gotta get you over here to do my english essays for me i have a 3 page essay due every other day.... glad this semester will be the last one i have 2 take english in! NO MORE ENGLISH FOR ME!

[cpnichol]

Nicely written essay.

I don't like the idea of irreducible complexity, it just seems to say "we can't explain this, therefore "a designer" must have done it". I find this a very strange way of viewing the world, if you apply that to everything in life you would never learn anything, just shrug and think "a designer" did it.

The examples typically used by supporters of irreducible complexity have been shown to be reducible. The evolution of the eye has been well documented and the flagella has been shown to be reducible with the discovery of "type III secretion systems". Yet they still get used as examples of irreducible complexity, perhaps some people simply want it to be true and ignore anything that says otherwise.

The more we learn about the world around us, the more we understand and can explain.

[XTR3M3]

The National Weather Service states that the odds in a given year of being struck by lightning are 1/700,000 based off reports. Given this, the odds of being struck by lightning 365 times are 700,000 raised to the 365th power. I could not find a variable to enter into the equation that could factor in these being 365 consecutive daily strikes. Needless to say that the number would be astronomical.

My demographic has a 47% greater chance of being struck based of the reported statistics of strikes. (700,000 ^365)(2.1276595744680851063829787234043). My state is in the bottom 6 in the US for human lightning strikes. (700,000 ^365)(8.333...)(2.1276595744680851063829787234043) . The whole equation would be (700,000 ^365)(8.333...)(2.1276595744680851063829787234043) X. The X being the unknown variable representing the strikes being consecutive daily strikes. The factor that lowers my State's strike rate is the type of lightning we have...mostly sheet and cloud to cloud. Very few bolt and cloud to ground/ground to cloud occurrences in my area. Florida has the highest occurences...so put up a rod Weaver lol.

In my opinion, the reason the probability is higher is that the lightning is a measurable occurrence whereas the life begining randomly from non-living substances is completely theoretical. The theoretical aspect of if raises the probablity to almost infinitely impossible levels.

I would love it if someone could calculate the "X" variable. It would have to factor in known weather patterns for an area, recorded strikes on each calendar day for that area, and the probability of a lightning generating storm happening every day for 365 consecutive days. (my calculator just flipped me off even considering it lol)