Since science has progressed to a point where we know much more about the specified complexities of life than we did over the past 30 years this quote holds more water than ever…“There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter.” A conclusion of the 7th International Conference on the Origins of Life, Mainz, July 1983.
How did atoms create new information in which other things could be built? Information is vital, as I stated many times without specified information, life doesn’t exist. Similar to that of software of a computer, in order for the machine to work, the software must be specified in a particular area to perform certain tasks. If one specifies how to cook a chicken in the computer language, this certainly one not make the computer function even though it’s specified information.
In September 18, 1999, in New Scientist it said, “Of course there is a “code” in living organisms, but that doesn’t mean that such “code” is intentional, that is, the project of a God. The information “is simply there” in the evolutionist’s mind. It has “maked” itself.” This statement holds true for many evolutionists today!
Doesn’t sound like a logical stance based on the evidence. The evolutionist replies, “Well the information is simply there” which doesn’t hold any proof that it’s origin is accidental. The claim begs the question, how does an evolutionist know it’s not intentional? It’s been observe that codes and information have been created by intelligence. The very things we use like our cars, cell phones, microwaves, LCD TV, were all created with information coming from intelligent sources. On the other hand, we haven’t observed any accidental sources which had created specified information of something totally new, not something which was already there, and then making it functional.
Mutations are very important in the story of evolution but they need to prove much more than creating novel proteins or simply duplicate existing base pair sequences or reduce the specificity of the active site of an enzyme (so that, in spite of being less able to do its job, can digest a related substrate).
This particular evolutionist invented the idea of endosymbiosis to account for the origin of mitochondria and chloroplasts in eukaryotic cells, she said in her book, Acquiring genomes. A theory of the origins of species, Basic Books, New York, 2002….”Mutation accumulation does not lead to new species or even to new organs or tissues.” (p. 11) and “Mutations, in summary, tend to induce sickness, death, or deficiencies.” (p. 29) This reminds my of a recent saying, there is no new mutation that eases the causes of cancer nor does mutations cure cancer.