Monthly Archives: November 2007

Evolution’s Popular Missing Pieces

Posted on by

Okay, you keep hearing about the debate on evolution. And you may be one who just wants to say the evidence is just so convincing. And then you want to say it’s just a bunch of religious fanatics that say the other explanation is only biblical. Really? I’m a scientist in Life Sciences with a doctorate and I’m aware of a flaw in this thinking.

Time to step out of the rut. The Bible may hold some relevance, but what if the data from scientific pursuits remind us how evolution theory rests on other legs that aren’t “so there to begin with.” Like get real … and take a long look at all the evidence before you go off blasting the evolution trumpet.

Neglected Missing Pieces From Astronomy and Chemistry

Chemistry: Have you ever wondered why all the discussion on evolution focuses on events AFTER life appears in the fossil record? What about the formation of the very first life forms–from scratch. A cell from pre-biotic chemicals is the assumption.

Astronomy and Physics: What about the odds on the Universe being able to support life in the first place, that comes with a long list of ‘precise’ conditions. So many in fact to leave us with the sense that chance does not account for just right conditions. To make the assumption that’s “physics by chance” is also a “Just So Story.” We’re not talking luck, it’s probabilities that are so slim as to suggest it just shouldn’t be.

A Published Examination of Origins Scenarios–Chemistry’s Missing Piece

Let’s just go back in time for a minute and look at a book written by Thaxton, Bradley, and Olsen (all Ph.D. scientists), entitled “The Mystery of Life’s Origin.” The Forward to this book is written by a chemist, Dr. Dean Kenyon, who wrote a textbook on the topic of the assumed pre-destiny of life from pre-biotic chemicals. The striking thing about the Thaxton, et al., book is that the text examines as many conceivable scenarios, as was practical at the writing of their text, for the presumed chemical origin of life scenarios offered by other scientists. Their examination is a rigorous effort to consider every aspect to what might have occurred to allow any form of initial life to form from Earth’s early conditions and chemicals.

Seriously, the results discourage any plausible explanation from surfacing. The “Mystery of Life’s Origin” (Free here as a PDF book) may be hard to find today, it was published 1984 with a fourth printing in 1992 (ISBN 0-929510-02-8). The jacket includes comments from other scientists that indicate this is a “…valuable summary of evidence against chemical evolution …” and “The authors have made an important contribution to the origin of life field.”

Are there any other books that compliment the efforts by Thaxton and his coauthors? There are the occasional papers in science journals or news magazines to suggest possible avenues from chemicals to life, but a more recent summary by Rana and Ross in their book (“Origins of Life,” ISBN 1-57683-344-5, see book link at bottom of this article) goes the next step. This book was published in 2004. The striking thing about this text is the added perspective that an astronomer (Dr. Ross) and biologist (Dr. Rana) can give us … as soon as planet Earth cooled to the point of being hospitable enough for life to start …. evidence for life appears.

How then does one go from the assumption that chemical evolution requires time to give us the first form of life and thereafter it is time and progressive conditions that allow for life to evolve to an ever more complex state. Ironically, the assumption is life starts simple and then gets complex. Why then is it that we forget to credit the simplest of life forms with complex features (structural or chemical, either way complexity exists from the very start).

Go Back to the Beginning: First, Set The Stage for Life

We’d like to draw you back to the physics and astronomy that provides a wonderful inference that our place in the universe seems to be no insignificant placement.

Drs. Gonzalez and Richards have coauthored a book that compiles scientific perspectives based on current data that tell us, as their book’s titles says it well … we live on “The Privileged Planet.” The book sub-title is “How our place in the cosmos is designed for discovery.”

This publication tells us the data say some interesting things. The fact that the universe seems so vast is really no reason to say life on earth is simply by chance. The number of facts, principles, and conditions that point to what is required to support life counters the Copernican Principle–which essentially would lead us to think our planet, Earth, is really not so special. The Earth and Moon are mated in ways that drive the tides, influence seasons, and make for eclipses that make scientific data gathering a unique earthbound activity. In fact, the book by Gonzalez and Richards cites numerous conditions, natural laws, and physical properties that fine tune the entire cosmic system that sustains life. For those who like to watch better than read, there is a DVD presentation available by the same title as the book.

But hold on, Windowview is not about promoting books and videos, but rather we are interested in viewing and considering evidence that leads us to a greater understanding to our being human and our existence.

What are we driving at here? Simply put, by recognizing that the evolution viewpoint skips over ‘missing pieces’ to what should explain life’s natural origin, we run into a rather unnatural prospect. The scientific data we have is amazing! To think it merely provide an all material explanation for our being here … is not so. Thinking that one day a material explanation will be surfacing … is maybe not worth holding one’s breath for, for the data speak clearly today.

Strip Away The Assumptions And What Have We Got?

The data all say life can show changes and to a degree we can say there is something called evolution. But the evidence is clearly temporal, over short time frames, not long ones. Go back far enough and Chemistry and Astronomy are standing there with locked arms. It’s not just a gap. It’s a hurdle. Unless we jump from the base to the summit of the mountain, it’s best to remember that evolution’s supporters don’t want to address the big questions that precede any consideration of biological evolution “a la Darwin.”

At Windowview we encourage our visitors and viewers to read more and to explore the depths of the issues. Explore, look, read, and think … and if you like … the books mentioned above are listed on our book page.

A Note About Intelligent Design

Windowview was a web site in it’s infancy long before the concept of Intelligent Design was made popular. Our concern here is not so much in promoting a movement or a term coined to designate an interesting perspective on the topic of life’s origin. There is one added consideration that’s getting lost in the media and in the debates. Science evidence does have some eye-opeing aspects that institutional blinders have cut off. Even if it does not serve evolution well … drop the assumptions and look at what answers can be stated specifically without resting on ‘the presumed.’ This is a most important exercise simply because it forces us to think outside the box. This forces us to consider some explanations others just don’t want to even mention. But what if that gets us closer to the explanation for the question as asked! Objectivity comes with some creative, yet realistic, well grounded, non-reductionist thinking.

Director 11/19/2007

Share

Intelligent Design on Trial — Kitzmiller and Miller Miss The Point

Posted on by

Kenneth R. Miller, Ph.D., Embarrassment to Brown University — Exemplifies Intelligent Design With Tie Clip!

Public Broadcasting (PBS) on November 13, 2007, aired their best shot at dogmatizing evolution in the name of countering the concept of Intelligent Design (ID). The television show is based on the Kitzmiller versus the Dover Board of Education trial that was concluded by the decision written by Judge Jones in 2005. The trial is over, the debate is just beginning. NOVA, in the episode entitled “Judgement Day – Intelligent Design On Trial” shows examples of evolution without critique, but in cases where examples of ID are illustrated, the show adds a negative or a rebuttal spin. As a scientist with a doctorate, as the author of this piece you are now reading, I’ve learned to be more the detective, more discerning, than what PBS has done with their programming. If I were to give ID a chance to be known for what it is, I’d engage in a more objective review. Which NOVA did not do … to the detriment of us all.

The Unsuspecting Viewers That We May Be

To the unsuspecting viewer, the anti-religion theme wins the day while leaving unanswered the real question as to whether any other theory offers sound thinking on the origins of complex life. Is it really (macro-) evolution? By the way ID proponents don’t think science evidence nor even the use of the word evolution is to be cast away. Micro-evolution is something ID considered as credible (follow the link to read about the difference between micro- and macro-evolution).

The notion that some highly specific examples within our bodies, organs, and cells, reveal evidence to life being by design was grossly misrepresented by PBS. Case in point, Dr. Kenneth Miller, of Brown University, makes a most UN-academic and scientifically humiliating example of himself, and thus of the Ivy League itself. During the Dover trial, Dr. Miller tried to make light or fun of the concept of intelligent design. In so doing, he only proved ID a possibility and perhaps simply correct.

A Trait of Design Comes With Complexity

In Dr. Michael Behe’s book (“Darwin’s Black Box”), a mouse trap is used as an analogy to illustrate design and complexity. Intelligent design appears in the form of irreducible complexity. The mouse trap is NOT a mouse trap without all its component parts. Take away any one part and the trap is non-functional–not a mouse trap. How could the trap evolve by a step-by-step process. It just has to be put all together at one time to work.

Dr. Miller, in the Dover courtroom, wore a mousetrap (minus two parts) to illustrate how the remaining parts make a tie clip. He wore the dismembered mouse trap as a clip on his tie when in the courtroom. NOVA used this example to make the point that something functional could still be derived from the parts of the mouse trap … as if to say the trap might still evolve from the tie clip. [In fact to de-evolve by loss of parts is something that indeed occurs in nature, in the other direction is a more improbable biological road to travel]

What the editors and producers of NOVA don’t want you to realize is that Dr. Miller had to THINK about the alternatives. Dr. Miller was a cause for the intelligent removal of two parts of the trap and he by his own directed intelligent agency placed the non-functional trap onto his own tie.

Intelligent Design is not only illustrated by Dr. Miller, a critic of ID himself mind you, but he opens the door to the concept that there is irreducible complexity in that if we remove yet one more piece, not even the tie clasp would function. Both the tie clasp and the mouse trap really have no progenitor other than by intelligence.

Design by Examples

Intelligence DESIGNS mouse traps, tie clasps, new models of automobiles (for every new model year, humans are the designers), and many other examples of highly specified structures that we commonly encounter in our daily lives. Why is it so hard to see how intelligence can easily be responsible for the complex molecular machines in cells, the incredibly mated structures of male and female reproductive organs (you think chance developed all that stuff?), the highly specific genetic code (that goes way beyond the complexity of computer code created by humans), and the fact that multiple mutations (that are presumed to drive evolution over time) are now shown to lead to lethal results. A single mutation might be benign or of some benefit, but add a second and third mutation in combination and evolution theory is in trouble! Is evolution and life by chance?

Dr. Miller should not be credited for an example of how ID fails–instead he only makes the point for ID!

The episode of NOVA fails to put all the cards on the table and the producers have played slight of hand–hidden key cards–failed to tell the whole story. But then the editorial staff has designed the show to tell the story the way they want you to see it.

See The Big Picture!

At Windowview we encourage our visitors and viewers to read more and to explore the depths of the issues. One of the religiously motivated persons on the NOVA episode was actually correct in saying “Why shouldn’t we examine all sides of the issue. Why shouldn’t that be the part of an open, free thinking curriculum in the public classroom?” [paraphrase]

Stripped of outside religious bias or spin, ID is really focused on the scientific evidence and where it leads. The NOVA episode barely showed the number of publications that span the sciences– ID looks at evidence from biology, chemistry, physics, microbiology, cell biology, genetics, information theory, astronomy, and more.

The conclusion we leave you with is simple … life, its origin, and your being conscious and being human is incredible! We know YOU ask the questions! You know that being alive is special. To explore for answers is really our task in life. To be empowered to seek answers truthfully is a wonderful place to be!

Perhaps Dr. Miller fails to open the door to free thinking–even in the face of compelling thoughts and evidence for ID. He used intelligence to design an illustration to mock ID, but then only proved the very point he was criticizing! “Go figure.” Go forth and figure for yourself!

2022 UPDATE – New Publications Add Vital Important Evidence

From the time of the trial to 2022, numerous books have been published that provide so much evidence for design in nature that the trial in 2005 would have had an entirely different outcome. To see titles of many of the newer and important books covering complexity of information in life, fossils and body plans, scientific evidence that covers astronomy to cell since, click on this link to review more recent title!

Director, Windowview.org 11/16/07 Update 11/12/22

Share