Is there Scientific Proof that God Exists? Part 3
Recent scientific evidence strongly points to the existence of God
. In fact the evidence is so lengthy that entire books have been written about it. I especially recommend Lee Strobel's The Case for a Creator. Specifically, the existence of God is demonstrated in 1) the evidence of a "Big Bang" caused by a First Mover; 2) the Design of the Universe; 3) the fine tuning of the Universe; 4) the fine tuning of earth's biosphere; 5) the complexity of organisms discovered by microbiology and microchemistry; 6) the information in DNA; 7) the existence of consciousness in the brain; 8) the sense of commonmorality throughout the world; and 9) the world wide observance of a seven day week. I am addressing each of these "proofs" in a 5 part series published on ArticlesBase.com. Of course, many scientists continue to deny the existence of God for a variety of reasons that will also be addressed in the last of this series of articles. This week address reasons 5 and 6 (see above). (Footnotes omitted. Go to www.heartpointe.com for complete text and footnotes.)
5. The complexity of organisms discovered by molecular biology and biochemistry point to Intelligent Design. Darwin acknowledged that "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed in numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." Lehigh University biochemistry professor Michael Behe asserts that many examples of such organs and organisms exist. Two examples that he provides are the cilium and the flagellum. Cilia are microscopic hairs on the surface of cells such as the ones which line our respiratory tract. Cilia are an important reference point because every single biological cell has approximately 200 cilia. Without the cilia a cell does not function. Behe explains that at a bare minimum cilia have three parts: rods, linkers, and motors. Each part is indispensible to the other and the cilia cannot operate if any one of the parts is missing making the cilia irreducibly complex. To illustrate Behe points to the design and function of a mousetrap:
"First, there's a small wooden platform to which the other parts are attached. Second, there's a metal hammer, which does the job of crushing the mouse. Third, there's a spring with extended ends to press against the platform and the hammer when the trap is charged. Fourth, there's a catch that releases when a mouse applies a slight bit of pressure. And, fifth, there's a metal bar that connects the catch and holds the hammer back when the trap is charged.
"Now, if you take away any of these parts the spring or the holding bar or whatever then it's not like the mousetrap becomes half as efficient as it used to be Instead, it doesn't catch any mice. It's broken. It doesn't work at all."
Similarly, Behe states that if you take away just one part of a cilium (singular for cilia) it cannot function. The right parts, with the right sizes, and in the proper location must all be present for a cilium to function. According to Behe, it is inconceivable how a cilium could evolve or develop gradually over time it had to be designed.
As another example, Behe references bacterial flagellum. The flagellum has a whip-like propeller (think of the tail of sperm) made out of a protein called flagellin. The flagellum's propeller spins at ten thousand revolutions per minute (a high revving car engine typically redlines at nine thousand revolutions per minute). Additionally, the flagellum's propeller can stop spinning within a quarter turn (no car engine can do that) and immediately spin in the opposite direction at ten thousand rpm (car engines cannot do that either). Harvard University's Howard Berg calls it "the most efficient motor in the universe." The flagellum is about 1/10,000th of an inch long with a "motor" that is 1/100,000th of an inch long. Moreover, the flagellum has a sensory system (like a smart missile) that steers it. The flagellum is made up of 30 to 35 proteins, but at a minimum the flagellum has three parts: a paddle, a rotor, and a motor. If any one of those three parts is missing you do not get a less efficient flagellum spinning at only 5,000 rpm you get a broken flagellum that does not function. No one has been able to conceive of an evolutionary gradualist explanation. Even at perhaps especially at 1/10,000th of an inch the flagellum reflects intelligent design as it is "irreducibly complex and "a huge stumbling block to Darwinian theory."
Michael Behe is not the only scientist who marvels at the machine like complexity of cells, Bruce Alberts, President of the National Academy of Sciences notes,
"We have always underestimated the cell The entire cell can be viewed as a factory that contains an elaborate network of interlocking assembly lines, each of which is composed of a set of large protein machines these protein assemblies contain highly coordinated moving parts."
When confronted with the compelling evidence of the machine like structure of a cell as a case for intelligent design University of Chicago microbiologist James Shapiro responds,
There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.
This statement is echoed by biochemist Franklin Harold who also acknowledges that "there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical system, only a variety of wishful speculations" (emphasis added). Respected scientist Allan Sandage analyzes the evidence quite differently,
"I am convinced that the existence of life with all its order in each of its organisms is simply too well put together The more one learns of biochemistry the more unbelievable it becomes unless there is some type of organizing principle an architect for believers"
Which do you find more compelling: the "scientific argument" for "wishful speculations" or the more theological explanation of an Intelligent Design? Given such evidence as the machine like complexity of cells and other organisms increasingly even scientists are finding the argument for Intelligent Design harder to refute.
6. The information encoded into DNA points to a Divine Encoder. The incredible complexity of DNA likewise points to Intelligent Design. Head of the international Human Genome Project that mapped the DNA sequence in humans, Francis Collins, describes DNA as follows:
"The newly revealed text was 3 billion letters long, and written in a strange and cryptographic four-letter code. Such is the amazing complexity of the information carried within each cell of the human body, that a live reading of that code would take thirty-one years Printing these letters out in regular font size on normal bond paper and binding them all together would result in a tower the height of the Washington Monument."
Collins calls DNA a human biological "instruction book, previously known only to God." In fact, DNA stores more information in a tiny single cell than the fastest most advanced supercomputer on the planet earth. So compelling is the evidence of DNA for Intelligent Design that not only did Francis Collins entitle his book on the project The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, but Dean Kenyon, a biophysicist from San Francisco State University, repudiated the conclusions of his book, Biochemical Predestination, and wrote, "This new realm of molecular genetics [is] where we see the most compelling evidence of design on the earth."
Hopefully this article will help you and your friends see the incredible scientific proof that exists for the existence of God. Please look for Parts 4 & 5 in this serieswhich will each address additional scientific proofs for the existence of God. If you have any questions or desire to discuss this further please feel free to contact me at steve@heartpointe.com.
Is there Scientific Proof that God Exists? Part 3
By: Steve Carlock
Scientific knowledge of PING G15 Iron Levels Of Water Purity For Scientific Applications Scientific Fitness Guide The Design Of Christian Louboutin Is Scientific The Garden Rooms that Help Scientific Research Scientific Careers: Pharmacology And Problems Of Employment Scientific Careers Theology, Faith, And Religious Beliefs Post-graduate Grading Principles Of The Scientific Workers Scientific Grants: Scientific Research Grants Program. Scientific Grants: Crdf Cooperative Grants Program. Considering Postgraduate Studies And/or Scientific Careers Physics As A Persons Scientific Career And Major Achievement. Scientific Careers Are Necessary In Any Field Of Modern Life