Origin Of Life And The Universe

Where Did Life Originate?

Many people assume that science has already proven how life began. A great number of people also assume that evolution is a settled matter. What is seldom known is that both the origin of life and the theory of evolution have not been scientifically proven.

See A List Of 1,000 Scientists Who Say That Evolution Is Wrong

Although attempts have been made at replicating the moment of creation, all efforts have thus far failed. The type of evolution that has been proven is not the type that most people assume. The evolution that scientists and evolutionists are describing when they tell you that evolution is a settled fact, is a process of adaptation that takes place within species. It does not mean that science has proven that an ape could evolve into a human being.

Evolution has proven that certain species are able to adapt to their environment by a process of evolution. Because this type of adaptability has been observed, it is assumed by the population that species may also evolve into new species. this is not true.

Science currently defines three types of evolution: Divergent, Convergent, and Parallel evolution.

As you will see in all three of these evolutionary models, there are no examples given of one species that develops into a new species. The type of evolution that is described by these three are changes that are observed within the same species.

Divergent: the most common and familiar type of evolution. Described as evolutionary patters in which two species gradually differ from each other and develop into a new variation of the same species. The only examples that are given for this type of evolution are birds which evolve from the original type of bird they once were because of changes in migration or isolation from the original bird. What is not disclosed in this case is that the new type of bird is still a bird, not a new species, but a variation of the original species.

Examples given for Divergent Evolution are the red fox and kit fox. Because of different climates and environments the ears change a well as the red coat of the red fox makes changes to adapt to its differing environment. Evolutionists freely admit that these changes are not genetic but environmental adaptation. Again, these foxes which live in different environments from their original locations and experience changes in their ears or fur coats, do not become a new species, they are still foxes.

This claim of Divergent Evolution is often expanded to include difference between the human and primate foot. The problem is that no proof is given for how an ape became a human in the first place, which are two completely different species. These changes in the type of foot between a man and an ape are irrelevant since they are still independent species.

Convergent Evolution: occurs when certain species of different ancestry begin to show analogous traits by their shared environments. Again, these adaptive changes that are necessitated by environment, does not create a new species but simply causes evolution within the same species to suit their new environment.

Examples given for Convergent Evolution are birds, bats and pterosaurs which evolve in lineage at different times and flight capacities. Their wings changed, their flight patterns changed, but birds are still birds, and bats are bats; no change from one species to another.

Parallel Evolution: takes place when two unrelated species begin to develop the same characteristics or adaptive mechanisms of another species, made necessary by their environments. The focus here is that these two different species, although they develop similar adaptability traits, they remain two separate species. The assumption that is made here is that if enough time is given, these differences will add up to a completely different species. The evolution of species is assumed, not proven by scientific facts, observations, or evidence.

Examples given for Parallel Evolution are the plumes of birds which begin to look similar within different types of birds. Again, no change of a bird to another species. Different types of Birds develop changes that resemble the bird of a different type, because of adaption to environment.

There exists no example of any bird which becoming a frog; an ape becoming a man, or any specific species evolving into a completely different species. There are no intermediary species between two different species in the vast fossil record of earth. Despite numerous falsified and counterfeit attempts put forth by past evolutionary activists who produced intermediate species by assembling bones from different species, there is NO EVIDENCE for evolution of species.

When evolutionists speak of evolution of species, they are describing one type of bird or fox or other animal which exhibits changes that are dissimilar to other animals in their type and like animals of a different type. All of these changes are for the purpose of adaptation but they do not cause a new species to develop.

The Lack of Evolutionary Evidence

  • The fact that no fossil record exists in the massive number of specimens that are on the earth, that shows that one species has become a completely new species. All that we see are common attributes that are shared between many species that indicates that they all have a common creative source.
  • The examples of adaptability within species to their environment is not conclusive evidence of speciation. Simply because we observe certain species with the ability to evolve in order to adapt to their environment, does not mean that they may become a completely new species. This has never been observed.
  • In July 2016, scientists reportedly identified a set of 355 genes from the last universal common ancestor (LUCA) from all organisms that are living on Earth. All that his study demonstrates is a common creative source, not that all species originated from a single species. If this were true, certainly there would be some evidence in the geologic record; there is none.
  • More important, evolution has never provided us with an answer as to how life began in the first place. Many theories have been put forth, but all have failed the scientific tests of verification. No scientist has ever been able to duplicate in the laboratory, the moment when life began on its own.
  • Today, because of the complexity of the cell, scientists understand that life is much more rare and difficult to begin that first believed. As we examine the universe, we realize just how special and unique the earth is and the fact that an extraordinary species of highly intelligent beings, inhabits this planet.
  • The chance that these same conditions could exist anywhere else in the universe, even with the vast number of stars and planets that are certain to exist, is highly improbable.

How Did Life Really Begin?

When we look at the actual evidence that exists for the universe we see that life began exactly as the Bible describes: God created the universe for human life on earth (Genesis 1:1-2).

In order to understand how human life is possible we must go back to the beginning when the universe came into existence. The basic premise for understanding the universe, begins with an acknowledgement of what we can observe: A cosmos so immense and complex that it necessitates a Creator.

Many of the details of the first moments of the universe are divided into picoseconds and microseconds. These might seem like insignificant details to us who live within hours, days, weeks, months, and years; but in the subatomic world of particle physics, a picosecond can be a very long period of time. There are some subnuclear particles that require only a trillion-trillionth of a second to complete their decay. This gives us an idea how much was occurring in the just the first second of the expansion of the universe. The details that we are interested in, at this point, is in understanding how many of these tiny details took place in the first moments of the cosmos. Had any one of these processes been altered—even slightly, say 1040, the universe would have been vastly different and would not be able to sustain any advanced life form.

If, for example, the initial expansion of the universe was slightly smaller, it would have immediately collapsed back upon itself; and no universe would have begun. Had the expansion been just slightly larger, the dispersal of gases would have been too rapid to congeal into galaxies.

Most of us understand that an explosion is an unpredictable event. When something explodes, as in the first moments of the Big Bang, these events are not smooth and orderly. There may be slightly more material expanding in one direction, different from the amount of material being dispersed in the opposite direction. We do not see this in our universe. At the initial expansion of the Big Bang, the amount of matter was even in all directions. This is the main reason that the universe looks the same from any given point. We see an even distribution of galaxies in every direction in the universe. This even distribution of matter in all directions could not have occurred without intervention.

Theoretical Physicist Alan Guth, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, put forth the idea, in the 80’s, that in the initial moments of the Big Bang (Moment of Creation), had the explosion not been uniform or controlled; it would have been quite disorderly. A microsecond after the universe began its initial expansion, it jumped in size by ten trillion-trillion (1025). It was then that the entire expansion stopped, and a normal rate of expansion began. This rapid and sudden expansion had the effect of “stretching out” the irregularities of the initial disorderly explosion. This is interesting, considering that 3,000 years ago, God is described as “stretching out” the heavens.

…God…Who stretched out the heavens like a curtain.  —Psalms 104:1 (RCR)

Once the rapid expansion ceased and a normal rate of expansion started again, the material of the universe could develop into an orderly and even universe.[1]

What caused the initial sudden expansion and what force caused it to cease, only to resume itself once again, in an orderly fashion?

Guth’s proposal was that anti-gravity caused the initial sudden and uneven expansion of matter to quickly diminish and then stop. In the universe’s initial inflation, the expansion of gases was far too fast to form galaxies later on in the universe. This problem was solved by the force exerted by antigravity suddenly halting the initial rapid expansion. Incredibly, this all happened in 1032 seconds (a hundred, trillion-trillion-trillionth of a second).[2]

Most scientists today like this idea of “Inflation” as an answer for the initial expansion of the universe, but no one really understands—at this point, how the expansion ceased. The reason is that antigravity is so powerful; it could have easily overwhelmed the universe at its earliest stages. What caused the universe to extricate itself from this seemingly runaway process?

It is here, at the beginning of the universe that we find the most compelling scientific evidence for how the universe actually began. Guth’s proposal has left one thing unexplained: what force stopped the expansion, caused space to stretch itself out and then resume the expansion of the universe?

When we investigate the data that scientists give us for this event, it becomes clear that there was an outside force acting upon the universe to stop it, cause inflation, and restart the expansion again. A natural explanation is given but does this really solve the dilemma of how this happened? No it does not.

We see this problem of a natural process as the answer for how, when we investigate the beginning off the universe, further:

Rate of expansion: As the energy of the universe began to move out from its initial expansion, this energy was unevenly distributed. At a point near the beginning, a short burst of energy called “inflation” caused the universe to increase in size enormously by 1025 or ten trillion—trillion times its original size. Had all of the energy from the initial universe been evenly distributed, apart from a sudden inflation and return to normal expansion, it would have been impossible for the existing matter to form galaxies far into the future. Because the universe began with energy evenly distributed, during the sudden increase in size—this inflation stretched away all of these irregularities, causing an even distribution of galaxies in all directions, which is observable today. Incredibly, this initial expansion—appears to have been controlled in such a precise way that it allowed for just the right amount of irregularities to permit a “clumping” of matter that would produce galaxies later on. Computer models show that the energy difference between the peaks and valleys of this density had to be close to 0.00001, or no galaxies would have been able to form. A rate slightly higher or lower, and the matter necessary to form galaxies, stars, and planets, much later—would not have been possible. This is profound evidence of controlled design.

What happened at the initial moment of the universe to stop a massive explosion and distribute matter purposefully, and then restart the expansion once again. Watch an explosion in slow motion and imagine how you would stop this process and run through the material that was being ejected—manually placing it into specific areas, then restarting the explosion and allowing it to continue. Sound impossible? It is.

This is precisely what happened when the universe began.

It is my opinion that the evidence proves that an infinitely intelligent and powerful Being conducted this initial process because it was necessary for life to be possible on earth, many billions of years later.

The following is an illustrative YouTube video of the events that took place during the inception of the universe.

Why a Universe at All?

One of the baffling questions in the study of the initial moments of the Big Bang, is why we have a universe which is clearly designed for life, instead of one which would make life impossible. Given the parameters which were present during the first moments of the universe, a vastly different result would be expected. The fine-tuning of the universe, which existed at the beginning of the Big Bang, was so essential for life that even the basic element of carbon—of which all human beings are made—would not exist, had the universe began by any other process.

“It has been frequently argued that there are many curious coincidences in the relations between the constants of Nature upon which life on Earth seems to depend…One of the most striking of such apparent coincidences was revealed with William Fowler’s confirmation of Fred Hoyle’s remarkable prediction of the existence of a particular energy level of carbon which, had it not existed, would have meant that the production of heavy elements in stars would not have been able to proceed beyond carbon, leaving the planets devoid of nitrogen, oxygen, chlorine, sodium, sulphur, and numerous other elements.”[3] —Roger Penrose

This indicates that all of the “coincidences” in the origin of the universe were actually designed, engineered, and constructed in the precise manner necessary for life on earth, much later.

In concluding his estimation of how the universe began, Dr. Penrose moves towards the “miraculous” as the most reasonable explanation for the unique and precise early state of the Big Bang.

“If we do not assume the Second Law, or that the universe originated in some extraordinarily special initial state, or something else of this general nature, then we cannot use the ‘improbability’ of the existence of life as a premise for a derivation of a Second Law that is operative at times earlier than the present. No matter how curious and non-intuitive it may seem, the production of life would (if we do not make a prior assumption of the Second Law) be far less probable to come about by natural means—be it by natural selection or any by other seemingly ‘natural’ process—than by a ‘miraculous’ creation simply out of random collisions of the constituent particles!”[4]

Since a state of extremely low entropy at the beginning of the Big Bang was a primary component in the formation of the early universe—this stands as empirical evidence for design. This initial low entropy most certainly did not happen by chance; as the natural state of the initial universe should have exhibited a very high degree of disorder. The fact that the universe began by a great deal of organization—controlled to exact a specific result that would permit life billions of years later, these details demand an intelligent source.

We should remember that the specific type of universe which developed during the hundred trillion-trillion-trillionth of a second of the initial expansion of the universe, were critically controlled by forces unknown to scientists today.[5] From this point and continuing throughout the expansion of the universe, this control has been continually ordered in such a way that life would be possible in one specific Galaxy, one Solar System, and one planet. At the formation of earth, this design continued in directing the absolute necessary constants of the Solar System and the earth, which would allow human life to dwell upon its surface and prosper.

Evidence of Engineering

Their were many imperative conditions that were in place during the alleged 14 billion year history of the Cosmos, in order for for human beings to inhabit the earth today. This is not Cosmic Evolution, it is evidence of an actively involved Creator who has worked in great detail—for a very long period of time, to ensure that His most beloved creation: human beings, would have a dwelling place, perfectly suited for life. This process of preparing the universe for what was to come, is prime evidence that every event that took place over the entire history of the universe was engineered and planned to make our lives possible on earth.

Type of universe: Scientists are baffled by the type of universe which exists, having understood what the conditions were at the beginning. This is a primary and often understated reality of the universe. Given the explosion of all matter from the initial moment of the Big Bang, Physicists would have expected that a chaotic universe would have resulted from the ensuing expansion of gases—hostile to any form of life. The fact that so many necessary events took place, over such an extremely long period of time—designed to make life a reality and occurring numerous times, for billions of years—defines these events as supernatural, not random acts, nor the operation of an evolutionary process.

Science is founded upon the basis of observable, provable data. The evidence that is observable from the universe, indicates a super intellect is responsible for the cosmos, not a random set of events.

Many of the world’s greatest minds have examined the complexity of the universes and concluded that there is no possibility that the universe could have come into existence by itself.[6] The fact that the universes exists—requires a Super-Intellect, capable of unlimited engineering and Creative power.

This is the premise that is stated by the Bible: Man knows that God exists, by the things that He has made:

because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse...  —Romans 1:19-20

The world is a rational place. Effects follow cause. A universe as magnificent as the one we find ourselves in, must logically have come from a power and intelligence of infinite capacity. It is interesting that the singularity known today as the Big Bang is described as a moment when nothing existed and then suddenly it exploded and expanded into stars, planets, and galaxies.[7]

The Beginning Of The Universe And The Bible

The first line of the Bible describes the moment of Creation as: In the beginning, there was nothing and then God spoke and the universe came into existence. Both the scientific description and the Biblical account detail the beginning of the universe in the same way.

Science has never demonstrated that anything can manifest itself by random chance or multiple mutative processes. In fact, what we observe in the universe is that all things have a purposeful reason for their existence. If we have a machine: a person created the parts for this machine and assembled them in such a way that it could function for a useful purpose.

All animals and human life suddenly appeared on the earth, fully functional, at precise moments—during earth’s past history. Science cannot demonstrate any species that came into being by random acts of mutation over a long period of time. What can be proven is that within certain species, there are adaptive evolutionary processes at work, that ensure the further existence of the species. This is not evolution of a species, but evolution within a species. No one has ever proven that one species has become a completely new species by an evolutionary process. The speculation that this is possible is all conjecture and theory, not scientific fact.

Made For A Purpose

Both animals and human beings were discernibly created in a very specific way to fulfill distinct functions. The mind of the human being, the emotions, and perception of moral right, comprehension of justice, and the ability to reason and to love; indicate that we were intelligently created in this way for a purpose. It is illogical and unreasonable that the ethereal, analytical part of the human soul—evolved. Evolution does nothing to explain the spiritual and emotional elements of man which are just as real and tangible as the physical.

The Bible describes man as created in the image of God. We are like our Creator in that we have the capacity for reason; we are able to create, order, and design things in our world. Human beings uniquely love, hate, feel deep emotion, and carry out great acts of courage and sacrifice. None of these traits of human consciousness would be possible or necessary had we simply evolved from lower life forms. Try to explain the deep sense of joy and satisfaction that you have when you create something beautiful or useful. In this experience, we can begin to understand the satisfaction that God had when He finished creating the universe, the earth and mankind, and said: It is good.

Evolution As A Theory

The supposition of evolutionary speciation is both unprovable and has no factual scientific basis. There is no evidence that any species of animal has ever evolved into a completely new species. There are mutations and adaptive evolutionary processes which have been observed within certain species, called Microevolution, but no Macroevolutionary process of new species evolving from a lower life form, other than a few assertions that simple plants, and insects have become new species.[8] You will find many claims by evolutionists in which the process of Microevolution is used as proof for the “possibility” of Macroevolution, but no actual evidence for this process is ever given.

A rather large problem for Speciation is that no evidence from the fossil record has ever been discovered which proves that one species has evolved into a new species. The field of micro-biology has validated the fact that macroevolution is not only unlikely, but impossible. Mutations and errors in DNA do not add new information nor help in causing a new species, in fact—they prohibit the possibility of a new species.

I have read many of the papers which purport evidence for Speciation—discovering in every case, these publications fall short of actually proving their claims by testable and observable scientific evidence.

What Does The Evidence Reveal?

The paleontological record of the earth shows that man in his present form, suddenly appeared on the earth about six thousand years ago, fully formed as a human being. There is not a single credible fossil that has been discovered which has demonstrated how a primate became a human being. Yet, this theory, stating that the highest life form on the earth, evolved from lower life forms, is being taught in our high schools and universities all over the United States, as if it is an established fact, when it is not.

In 2013, I traveled for two hours from our home to one of our favorite day trip destinations, the Grand Canyon in Northern Arizona. As you walk around the rim of the Canyon, there are several altars dedicated to evolution and secular humanism at various locations throughout the park. It is repeatedly stated, as fact, that the canyon was formed by the very gradual process of the Colorado River, wearing away at the dirt and rock, over millions of years. This great expansive canyon, ten miles wide and a mile deep—stretching for over 200 miles, was caused by the slow and gradual erosion of soil and rock.

This is only one theory for how the canyon manifested. We must remember that none of those whom put-forth this assertion were present when the canyon was formed. We really do not know how the Grand Canyon developed, nor the processes which caused it to exist.

Equally possible, is the theory that a great cataclysmic event took place during the earth’s past history, which caused the massive erosion of the canyon, in a very short period of time—rather than millions of years.

For decades, scientists have published, as a virtual certainty, their claim that the Canyon was formed over millions of years. They emphatically claim that this is the only means by which the immense canyon could have been created.

This was until May 18, 1980 at 8:32 a.m., when a 5.1 magnitude earthquake released enough energy at Mount Saint Helens in Oregon to cause the largest recorded landslide in the history of the Earth. The blast from super heated groundwater produced a massive explosion of powerfully heated material, moving laterally away from the mountain, in excess of three hundred miles per hour.[9]

Scientists estimate that the eruption reached its peak during a two-hour period of time between 3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., on May 18, 1980. The ensuing blast hurled millions of tons of hot rock and gas that melted the ice and snow on the mountain, producing a tremendous river of flowing mud, rock, and debris.[10]

The massive erosion that was created by these mudflows, devastated the area below Mt. Saint Helens. On March 19, 1980, just one day after the initial eruption, the massive flow of water, mud, and rock, had carved out a canyon 140 feet deep, and 17 miles long. This canyon was named “The Little Grand Canyon of the Toutle River.”

“The Little Grand Canyon of the Toutle River.” [11]

This canyon was created in a single day and is estimated to be 1/40th the size of the Grand Canyon in Arizona. A small creek now flows through the bottom of the Little Grand Canyon. The causal observer might imagine that it had taken thousands of years for this great chasm to form—while science confirms it took just twenty-four hours.[12]

Up to the time that Mount Saint Helens erupted and produced a mini Grand Canyon within a single day, scientists and geologists had no idea that such an event could occur in such a short period of time.

For this reason, it is rather disingenuous for the scientific community today to insist that geologic formations on the earth, such as the Grand Canyon, were formed solely by a process of millions of years of erosion.

In the same way, those who claim that the universe was created by natural processes which occurred over billions of years is quite frankly an incomplete hypothesis. The Big Bang may be one theory for the origination of the Universe, but there is another—more reasonable theory by which the universe came into existence; a creative act by an infinitely intelligent Being.

The first place that any credible scientists should look for evidence for why a particular phenomenon exists; is the obvious. If we observe a perfectly balanced and finely tuned universe that allows for life—within closely defined parameters, it is reasonable that an intelligence has acted upon time, space, and matter to make life possible.

The point of these examples from geology and astronomy is that those who claim to be experts on the origin of the universe are not always as “expert” as they claim. The wisdom that men and women assert concerning events which have taken place millions or billions of years ago is simply guesswork at best. There is nothing wrong with postulating a theory as long as you are honest enough and willing to allow equally plausible theories to be discussed and considered at the same time.

Of course, the agenda of Secular Humanism, which is a religion in its own right, begins with a premise that God does not exist, and therefore makes all of its subsequent observations and conclusions from this humanistic bias.

Where Jesus Christ is recognized and known, the human mind develops a place of fuller freedom and can achieve even greater knowledge than any secular or materialistic society could ever produce. This was the purpose for which Jesus came into the world: To bring men and women to their fullest potential and convey to us; understanding which is far greater than would be possible without the light of God’s revelation.

[1] “The Inflationary Universe: the quest for a new Theory of Cosmic Origins, New York, Perseus Publishing, 1998
[2] ibid
[3] Ibid, page 171
[4] Penrose, Roger (2011-09-06). Cycles of Time: An Extraordinary New View of the Universe (Kindle Locations 902-910). Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
[5] “The Inflationary Universe: the quest for a new Theory of Cosmic Origins, New York, Perseus Publishing, 1998
[6] “A Universe From God,” 2013, Robert Clifton Robinson, the chapter: “Scientists Who Believe in God.”
[7] E. J. Wollack, “Cosmology: The Study of the Universe”. Universe 101: Big Bang Theory. NASA. Archived from the original on 14 May 2011. Retrieved 27 April 2011. “The second section discusses the classic tests of the Big Bang theory that make it so compelling as the likely valid description of our universe.”
[8] In all of the following articles that purport to show evidence of speciation in evolution, at best a few plants and insects, with the possibility of a fish or two are sited. In no study, no such example of one species evolving into an completely different species is ever given. I have included the following references which are used by proponents of Macroevolution for your perusal.
1. Rice, W.R.; Hostert (1993). “Laboratory experiments on speciation: what have we learned in 40 years”. Evolution 47 (6): 1637–1653. doi:10.2307/2410209. JSTOR 2410209.
2. Jiggins CD, Bridle JR (2004). “Speciation in the apple maggot fly: a blend of vintages?”. Trends Ecol. Evol. (Amst.) 19 (3): 111–4. doi:10.1016/j.tree.2003.12.008. PMID 16701238.
3. Boxhorn, J (1995). “Observed Instances of Speciation”. TalkOrigins Archive. Retrieved 26 December 2008.
4. Weinberg JR, Starczak VR, Jorg, D (1992). “Evidence for Rapid Speciation Following a Founder Event in the Laboratory”. Evolution 46 (4): 1214–20. doi:10.2307/2409766. JSTOR 2409766.
5. Kirkpatrick, Mark; Virginie Ravigné (2002-03). “Speciation by Natural and Sexual Selection: Models and Experiments”. The American Naturalist 159 (3): S22–S35. doi:10.1086/338370. ISSN 00030147. JSTOR 3078919. PMID 18707367.
[9] Mount St. Helens – From the 1980 Eruption to 2000 by the U.S. Geological Survey
[10] Ibid.
[11] Used by Permission: Lloyd Anderson, Director MSH 7Wonders Creation Museum 4749 Spirit Lake Hwy Silverlake, WA  98645, February 22, 2013
[12] Peter Frenzen, monument scientist, http://nwcreation.net/mtsthelens.html

%d bloggers like this: