we have examined how impossible the accidental formation of
life is. Let us again ignore these impossibilities for just
a moment. Let us suppose that millions of years ago a cell
was formed which had acquired everything necessary for life,
and that it duly "came to life." Evolution again collapses
at this point. For even if this cell had existed for a while,
it would eventually have died and after its death, nothing
would have remained, and everything would have reverted to
where it had started. This is because this first living cell,
lacking any genetic information, would not have been able
to reproduce and start a new generation. Life would have ended
with its death.
This illustration shows
the sketch of the chemical reactions taking place in
a single cell. These intricate activities in the cell,
which can only be viewed with an electron microscope,
continue to take place flawlessly and ceaselessly.
The genetic system does not only consist of DNA.
The following things must also exist in the same environment:
enzymes to read the code on the DNA, messenger RNA to be produced
after reading these codes, a ribosome to which messenger RNA
will attach according to this code, transfer RNA to transfer
the amino acids to the ribosome for use in production, and
extremely complex enzymes to carry out numerous intermediary
processes. Such an environment cannot exist anywhere apart
from a totally isolated and completely controlled environment
such as the cell, where all the essential raw materials and
energy resources exist.
As a result, organic matter can self-reproduce
only if it exists as a fully developed cell, with all its
organelles. This means that the first cell on earth was formed
"all of a sudden," together with its incredibly complex structure.
So, if a complex structure came into existence
all of a sudden, what does this mean?
Let us ask this question with an example. Let
us liken the cell to a high-tech car in terms of its complexity.
(In fact, the cell is a much more complex and developed system
than a car.) Now let us ask the following question: What would
you think if you went out hiking in the depths of a thick
forest and ran across a brand-new car among the trees? Would
you imagine that various elements in the forest had come together
by chance over millions of years and produced such a vehicle?
All the parts in the car are made of products such as iron,
copper, and rubber-the raw ingredients for which are all found
on the Earth-but would this fact lead you to think that these
materials had synthesized "by chance" and then come together
and manufactured such a car?
There is no doubt that anyone with a sound mind
would realize that the car was the product of an intelligent
design-in other words, a factory-and wonder what it was doing
there in the middle of the forest. The sudden emergence of
a complex structure in a complete form, quite out of the blue,
shows that this is the work of a design.
Believing that pure chance can produce perfect
designs goes well beyond the bounds of reason. Yet every "explanation"
put forward by the theory of evolution regarding the origin
of life is like that. One outspoken authority on this issue
is the famous French zoologist Pierre-Paul Grassé, the former
president of the French Academy of Sciences. Grassé is an
evolutionist, yet he acknowledges that Darwinist theory is
unable to explain life and makes a point about the logic of
"coincidence," which is the backbone of Darwinism:
The opportune appearance
of mutations permitting animals and plants to meet their
needs seems hard to believe. Yet the Darwinian theory is
even more demanding: A single plant, a single animal would
require thousands and thousands of lucky, appropriate events.
Thus, miracles would become the rule: events with
an infinitesimal probability could not fail to occur… There
is no law against daydreaming, but science must not indulge
All living things in the world, all of which
are clear examples of the intelligent planning we have just
been discussing, are at the same time living evidence that
coincidence can have no role to play in their existence. Each
of its component parts-never mind a whole living creature-contains
structures and systems so complex that they cannot be the
work of coincidence. We need go no further than our own bodies
to find examples of this.
One example of this is our eyes. The human eye
sees by the working together of some 40 separate parts. If
one of these is not present, the eye will be useless. Each
of these 40 parts possesses complicated designs within itself.
The retina at the back of the eye, for instance, is made up
of 11 layers. Each layer has a different function. The chemical
processes that go on inside the retina are so complex that
they can only be explained with pages full of formulae and
The theory of evolution is unable to account
for the emergence of even such a flawless and complex structure
as a single eye by means of "accident," let alone life itself,
So, what does this extraordinary design in living
things prove to us about the origin of life? As we made clear
in the opening part of this book, only two different accounts
can be given regarding the origin of life. One is evolution,
the other intelligent creation. Since the evolution claim
is impossible, scientific discoveries therefore prove the
truth of creation. This truth may surprise some scientists,
who from the nineteenth century to the present have seen the
concept of "creation" as unscientific, but science can only
progress by overcoming shocks of this kind and accepting the
truth. Chandra Wickramasinghe describes the reality he faced
as a scientist who had been told throughout his life that
life had emerged as a result of chance coincidences:
From my earliest training
as a scientist, I was very strongly brainwashed to believe
that science cannot be consistent with any kind of deliberate
creation. That notion has had to be painfully shed. At the
moment, I can't find any rational argument to knock down
the view which argues for conversion to God. We used to
have an open mind; now we realize that the only logical
answer to life is creation - and not accidental random shuffling.281
Grassé, Evolution of Living Organisms, Academic Press,
New York, 1977, p. 103. (emphasis added)
281 Chandra Wickramasinghe, Interview
in London Daily Express, August 14, 1981.