|

Chapter 5
Atoms That
Come Alive
Up to here, we talked about
atoms and how matter is created out of nothing. We said that atoms
are the building blocks of everything whether animate or inanimate.
It is important to note that atoms are building blocks of animate
organisms as well as inanimate objects. Since atoms are inanimate
particles, it is extremely astonishing for them to be the building
blocks of living beings. This is also an issue evolutionists can
never explain.
Just as it is impossible to imagine pieces of stone coming together
to form living organisms, so is it impossible to imagine inanimate
atoms by themselves coming together to form living organisms. Think
about a lump of rock and a butterfly; one is inanimate, the other
is animate. Yet, when we delve into their essences, we see that
both are made up of the same sub-atomic particles.
The following example may be more explanatory regarding the impossibility
of inanimate matter transforming by itself into animate matter:
can aluminium fly? No. If we mix aluminium with plastic and gasoline,
can it fly? Of course it still cannot. Only if we bring together
these materials in a way so as to form an airplane, can they fly.
So, what makes an airplane fly? Is it the wings? The engine? The
pilot? None of these can fly by themselves. In fact, an airplane
is manufactured by the assemblage in a special design of different
pieces each of which has no ability to fly. The ability to fly is
derived neither from aluminium, nor plastic, nor gasoline. The specifications
of these substances are important, but the ability to fly can only
be gained by bringing these substances together in a very special
design. Living systems are no different. A living cell is formed
by the arrangement of inanimate atoms in a very special design.
Faculties of living cells, such as growth, reproduction and others,
are results of perfect design rather than the properties of molecules.
The design we find at this point is only God's creating the living
from the dead.
 |
Only God, the Almighty and the
Wise can give life to an inanimate substance, that is, create a
living being. Living systems have such complex structures that it
is still not fully understood how they operate despite the technological
facilities available today.
However, there is a reality that is understood by the help of the
science that made outstanding progress accompanied by a powerful
technology that advanced in a devastating way in the 20th century.
Living beings have extremely complex structures. When the theory
of evolution was advanced in the middle of the 19th century, scientific
research conducted with primitive microscopes had then created the
impression that the cell was just a simple lump
of matter.
In the 20th century, however, observation
and research made by the use of advanced instruments and electron
microscopes revealed that the cell, which is the building block
of living things, has an extremely complex structure that could
only have been formed as a result of perfect design. Most importantly,
this research showed that it is absolutely impossible for life to
arise spontaneously out of inanimate matter. The source of life
is life alone. This fact has been proved experimentally, too.1
This is a problem evolutionists can never resolve. For this reason,
instead of presenting scientific evidence, renowned evolutionary
scientists, who are at a great impasse, tell tales which amount
to nothing but window-dressing. They put forward totally illogical
and unscientific claims that matter has a consciousness, ability
and will of its own. Yet, they themselves do not believe these absurd
tales either and they are eventually forced to confess that the
main questions that need to be answered cannot be answered scientifically:
There was once a time before
our life, when the Earth was barren and utterly desolate. Our
world is now overflowing with life. How did it come about? How,
in the absence of life, were carbon-based organic molecules made?
How did the first living things arise? How did life evolve to
produce beings as elaborate and complex as we, able to explore
the mystery of our own origins?2
The outstanding evolutionary mystery now is how
matter has originated and evolved, why it has taken its present
form in the universe and on the earth, and why it is capable of
forming itself into complex living sets of molecules.3
As the evolutionary scientist above confesses,
the basic purpose of the theory of evolution is to deny that God
created living beings. Although the Truth of Creation is obvious
at every point of the universe and it has been definitively shown
that each detail is the product of a design too perfect to have
come about coincidentally, evolutionists turn a blind eye to this
fact and flounder in intellectual vicious circles.
Instead of believing this truth, however, evolutionary
scientists prefer talking about the talents of dead matter and how
inanimate bodies have transformed themselves into animate organisms.
While closing their eyes to the truth, these scientists unknowingly
put themselves to shame. It is obvious that claiming that atoms
have some kind of a gift and that they use this gift to transform
themselves into animate systems has nothing to do with reason.
After reading the example we will now quote,
you will decide for yourself how realistic these irrational tales
are. This is the scenario evolutionists claim, describing the transformation
of inanimate and unconscious atoms into animate organisms, and most
significantly, into people with high levels of consciousness and
intelligence.
| WHILE
ATOMS STUDY ATOMS |
 |
|
After the Big Bang, atoms, containing precisely
balanced forces, somehow brought themselves into being. While some
of the atoms, adequate in number to form the whole universe, formed
the stars and the planets, and some others the earth. Some of the
atoms making up the earth initially formed the land and later on,
suddenly decided to form living beings! These atoms first transformed
themselves into cells with highly complex structures and then produced
copies of the cells they formed by splitting into two, after which
they started speaking and hearing. Subsequently, these atoms transformed
into university professors viewing themselves under the electron
microscope and claiming that they came into being coincidentally.
Some atoms came together to form civil engineers who construct bridges
and skyscrapers, while some others came together to manufacture
satellites, space crafts and yet others specialised in the disciplines
of physics, chemistry and biology. Atoms like carbon, magnesium,
phosphorus, potassium and iron came together to form, instead of
a dark mass, perfect brains of exceptional complexity, the secrets
of which have not yet been fully unravelled. These brains started
seeing 3-dimensional images with a perfect resolution never yet
achieved by any technology. Some of the atoms formed comedians and
laughed at the jokes comedians made. Again, some atoms composed
music and enjoyed listening to it.
It is possible to prolong this story but let
us stop here and run an experiment to show that such a story can
never be realised. Let evolutionists put atoms, as much as required
of all elements forming life, into a barrel. Let them add in this
barrel whatever they think necessary for these atoms to unite to
form organic matter, and then let them wait. Let them wait for 100
years, 1000 years, and if necessary, for 100 million years transferring
responsibility to wait from father to son. Will a professor emerge
out of this barrel one day? Certainly not. Regardless of how long
they wait, a professor will not come out of this barrel. Not only
will there be no professor, but not even a single living being would
come out of this barrel. No birds, fishes, butterflies, apples,
elephants, roses, strawberries, oranges, violets, trees, ants, honeybees,
nor even a single mosquito would come out, because even if millions
of pieces of organic matter came together, they would not spontaneously
acquire the characteristics of a living being.
 |
Now, let us see whether unconscious atoms can
spontaneously form the DNA molecule, the cornerstone of life, and
proteins.
DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid), which is located
in the nucleus of the cell, contains the codes carrying the information
of all organs and all characteristics of the body. This code is
so complex that scientists were only able to translate it and then
to a very limited extent as late as the 1940s. DNA, which contains
all information on the living being it belongs to, is also able
to reproduce itself. How a molecule formed by the assemblage of
atoms can contain information and how it multiplies by copying itself
remain one of the unanswered questions.
Proteins are the buildings blocks of living beings and they play
a key role in many vital functions of the organism. For instance,
haemoglobin transports oxygen everywhere in our body, antibodies
render harmless microbes entering the body, and enzymes help us
to digest the food we eat and convert it into energy. The formulae
found in our DNA enable the manufacture of 50,000 different types
of proteins. As is obvious, proteins are highly crucial for the
survival of a living being and the absence of even one of these
proteins would make life impossible for that living being. It is
scientifically impossible for DNA and proteins, each a giant molecule,
to be formed spontaneously as a result of sheer coincidence.
The
DNA molecule
that contains the
complete information
of living cells in a
perfect coding
system has an
extremely complex
structure. The
flawless structure of
this molecule utterly
invalidates
evolutionists' claim
that it was formed by
chance. |
DNA is a series of nucleotides arranged in a
special sequence. A protein is a series of amino acids arranged
again in a special sequence. First of all, it is mathematically
impossible for either DNA molecules or protein molecules that come
in thousands of different types to sort out the appropriate sequences
necessary for life by chance. Probabilistic calculations reveal
that the probability of even the simplest protein molecules achieving
the right sequence by chance is zero. (For more information, see
the book The Evolution Deceit by Harun Yahya). In addition to this
mathematical impossibility, there is also an important chemical
obstacle to the coincidental formation of these molecules. If the
relationship between DNA and protein were a result of time, chance,
and natural processes, then there would be some sort of chemical
tendency towards DNA and protein to react, as acids and bases have
a great tendency to react. In that case, if chance had really played
a role, sugar-acid, aminephosphoric acid, and a whole host of other
natural chemical reactions would occur among any random fragments
of DNA and protein and the living beings we see today would not
form.
Does this natural tendency
of DNA and protein fragments to react chemically, then, suggest
that time, chance, and the laws of chemistry would eventually produce
life from some mixture of these molecules? No. Just the opposite.
The problem is that all these natural chemical reactions are the
wrong reactions as far as living systems are concerned. Left to
time, chance, and their own chemical tendencies, DNA and protein
react in ways that destroy a living system and would prevent any
postulated development of life.4
As seen, it is absolutely impossible for DNA and proteins, which
can by no means form randomly, to be left uncontrolled to form life
following their own formations. Jean Guitton, a contemporary philosopher,
addressed this impossibility in his book titled Dieu et la Science
(God and Science), stating that life could not have formed as a
result of coincidences:
Following which 'coincidence' did certain atoms
draw near each other to form the first molecules of amino acids?
Again, through which coincidence did these molecules come together
to form this extremely complex structure called DNA? I am asking
this simple question just like the biological scientist François
Jacob did: Who prepared the plans of the first DNA molecule to
give the first message that led to the birth of the first living
cell?
If one is satisfied with
assumptions involving coincidences, these questions - and many
others - remain unanswered; this is why, for the last few years,
the biologists began to change their views. Top researchers are
not satisfied by re-telling Darwin's laws without thinking, parrot-fashion;
they put forward new surprising theories. These are theories based
on the idea that an organizing principle that is apparently superior
to matter is involved in the process.5
As Jean Guitton stated, science has reached such
a point, in the light of research and scientific discoveries made
in the 20th century, that it has been scientifically established
that Darwin's theory of evolution has no validity whatsoever. American
biologist Michael Behe addresses this in his famous book Darwin's
Black Box:
Science has made enormous progress in understanding
how the chemistry of life works, but the elegance and complexity
of biological systems at the molecular level have paralysed science's
attempt to explain their origins. There has been virtually no
attempt to account for the origin of specific, complex biomolecular
systems, much less any progress. Many scientists have gamely asserted
that explanations are already in hand, or will be sooner or later,
but no support for such assertions can be found in the professional
science literature. More importantly, there are compelling reasons
- based on the structure of the systems themselves - to think
that a Darwinian explanation for the mechanisms of life will forever
prove elusive.6
Just as the entire universe was created from
nothing, so were living beings created from nothing. Just as only
nothing can come into existence out of nothing by chance, inanimate
matter cannot combine by chance to form living beings. Only God,
Possessor of infinite power, infinite wisdom and infinite knowledge,
has power to do all these.
1.Henry
M. Morris, Impact No. 111, Septemberl 1982 
2.Carl Sagan, Cosmos, Random House, April 1983, p. 24 
3.C.D. Darlington, Evolution for Naturalists, (NY, John Wiley, 1980)
p. 15 
4.Dr. Gary Parker, Impact No: 62, August 1978 
5.Jean Guitton, Dieu et La Science:Vers Le Métaréalisme,
Paris:Grasset, 1991, p. 38
6.Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box, Free Press, 1996, p.x  |