Website: Studying the Word of God
Authors: Brian K. McPherson and Scott McPherson
Web Address (URL): biblestudying.net
Atheism vs. Theism Discussion Points – Part 4
(Articles from Part 4: Atheism: Not Theories, Unsubstantiated Hyposthesis 3; Not
Theories, Unsubstantiated Hyposthesis 4; Scientists: Life on Earth Imported from Outer
Space; Atheism’s Circle of Reasons; Is God a White Crow? Pages 52-65, total = 14
pages.)
Discussion Points
Not Theories, Unsubstantiated Hyposthesis 3
1. Continued Sample Quotes and Claims
12) In all likelihood, the four bases arose together with a number of other
substances similarly constructed of one or more rings containing carbon and
nitrogen.
The first nucleic acid-like molecules probably contained an assortment of
these compounds. Molecules rich in A, U, G and C then were progressively
selected and amplified, once some rudimentary template-dependent synthetic
mechanism allowing base pairing arose. RNA, as it exists today, may thus have
been the first product of molecular selection.
A third stage in the evolution of the RNA world was the development of RNAdependent protein synthesis. Most likely, the chemical machinery appeared first,
as yet uninformed by genetic messages, as a result of interactions among certain
RNA molecules, the precursors of future transfer, ribosomal and messenger
RNAs, and amino acids. Selection of the RNA molecules involved could
conceivably be explained on the basis of molecular advantages, as just outlined.
But for further evolution to take place, something more was needed. RNA
molecules no longer had to be selected solely on the basis of what they were, but
of what they did; that is, exerting some catalytic activity, most prominently
making proteins. This implies that RNA molecules capable of participating in
protein synthesis enjoyed a selective advantage, not because they were themselves
easier to replicate or more stable, but because the proteins they were making
favored their replication by some kind of indirect feedback loop.
This stage signals the limit of what could have happened in an unstructured
soup. To evolve further, the system had to be partitioned into a large number of
competing primitive cells, or protocells, capable of growing and of multiplying by
division. This partitioning could have happened earlier. Nobody knows. But it
could not have happened later. This condition implies that protometabolism also
produced the materials needed for the assembly of the membranes surrounding
the protocells. In today's world, these materials are complex proteins and fatty
lipid molecules. They were probably simpler in the RNA world, though more
elaborate than the undifferentiated "goo" or "scum" that is sometimes suggested.
1
Once the chemical machinery for protein synthesis was installed, information
could enter the system, via interactions among certain RNA components of the
machinery--the future messenger RNAs--and other, amino acid-carrying RNA
molecules--the future transfer RNAs. Translation and the genetic code
progressively developed concurrently during this stage, which presumably was
driven by Darwinian competition among protocells endowed with different
variants of the RNA molecules involved. Any RNA mutation that made the
structures of useful proteins more closely dependent on the structures of
replicatable RNAs, thereby increasing the replicatability of the useful proteins
themselves, conferred some evolutionary advantage on the protocell concerned,
which was allowed to compete more effectively for available resources and to
grow and multiply faster than the others.
The RNA world entered the last stage in its evolution when translation had
become sufficiently accurate to unambiguously link the sequences of individual
proteins with the sequences of individual RNA genes. This is the situation that
exists today (with DNA carrying the primary genetic information), except that
present-day systems are enormously more accurate and elaborate than the first
systems must have been. Most likely, the first RNA genes were very short, no
longer than 70 to 100 nucleotides (the modern gene runs several thousand
nucleotides), with the corresponding proteins (more like protein fragments, called
peptides) containing no more than 20 to 30 amino acids.
It is during this stage that protein enzymes must have made their first
appearance, emerging one by one as a result of some RNA gene mutation and
endowing the mutant protocell with the ability to carry out a new chemical
reaction or to improve an existing reaction. The improvements would enable the
protocell to grow and multiply more efficiently than other protocells in which the
mutations had not appeared. This type of Darwinian selection must have taken
place a great many times in succession to allow enzyme-dependent metabolism to
progressively replace protometabolism.
The appearance of DNA signaled a further refinement in the cell's
information-processing system, although the date of this development cannot be
fixed precisely. It is not even clear whether DNA appeared during the RNA world
or later. Certainly, as the genetic systems became more complex, there were
greater advantages to storing the genetic information in a separate molecule. The
chemical mutations required to derive DNA from RNA are fairly trivial. And it is
conceivable that an RNA-replicating enzyme could have been co-opted to transfer
information from RNA to DNA. If this happened during the RNA world, it
probably did so near the end, after most of the RNA-dependent machineries had
been installed.
What can we conclude from this scenario, which, though purely hypothetical,
depicts in logical succession the events that must have taken place if we accept
the RNA-world hypothesis? And what, if anything, can we infer about the
protometabolism that must have preceded it? I can see three properties.
First, protometabolism involved a stable set of reactions capable not only of
generating the RNA world, but also of sustaining it for the obviously long time it
took for the development of RNA replication, protein synthesis and translation, as
2
well as the inauguration of enzymes and metabolism.
Second, protometabolism involved a complex set of reactions capable of
building RNA molecules and their constituents, proteins, membrane components
and possibly a variety of coenzymes, often mentioned as parts of the catalytic
armamentarium of the RNA world.
Finally, protometabolism must have been congruent with present-day
metabolism; that is, it must have followed pathways similar to those of presentday metabolism, even if it did not use exactly the same materials or reactions.
Many abiotic-chemistry experts disagree with this view, which, however, I see as
enforced by the sequential manner in which the enzyme catalysts of metabolism
must have arisen and been adopted. In order to be useful and confer a selective
advantage to the mutant protocell involved, each new enzyme must have found
one or more substances on which to act and an outlet for its product or products.
In other words, the reaction it catalyzed must have fitted into the protometabolic
network. To be sure, as more enzymes were added and started to build their own
network, new pathways could have developed, but only as extensions of what was
initially a congruent network.
It may well be, then, that clues to the nature of that early protometabolism
exist within modern metabolism. Several proposals of this kind have been made.
Mine centers around the bond between sulfur and a carbon-containing entity
called an acyl group, which yields a compound called a thioester. I view the
thioester bond as primeval in the development of life. - American Scientist article
- NOTE: It is worth noting in this long series of paragraphs the repeated use of
phrases such as "likelihood," "probable," and "may have," to describe speculative
events. Near the middle of the above section, the author even admits that his
proposed scenario is "purely hypothetical." It is significant that this
unsubstantiated, purely hypothetical scenario includes the development of
nucleotides, diversified forms of RNA, DNA, proteins, and a whole host of new
enzymes, and finally proto-cells themselves. In other words, the explanation of
how these very critical molecules came about is purely a matter of speculation
with no empirical evidence to substantiate those hypothetical explanations.
13) I have tried here to review some of the facts and ideas that are being
considered to account for the early stages in the spontaneous emergence of life on
earth. How much of the hypothetical mechanisms considered will stand the test of
time is not known. But one affirmation can safely be made, regardless of the
actual nature of the processes that generated life. These processes must have been
highly deterministic. In other words, these processes were inevitable under the
conditions that existed on the prebiotic earth. Furthermore, these processes are
bound to occur similarly wherever and whenever similar conditions obtain. American Scientist article
- NOTE: Here again at the end the author simultaneously refers to this series of
speculative events as both "facts and ideas" as well as "hypothetical machinery."
He is not even confident this speculation "will stand the test of time."
14) All of which leads me to conclude that life is an obligatory manifestation of
matter, bound to arise where conditions are appropriate. - American Scientist
article
3
15) Life is a cosmic imperative. The universe is awash with life. - American
Scientist article
- NOTE: The author has already admitted that this scenario is "purely
hypothetical." And now he admits that his conclusion that "life is an obligatory
manifestation of matter" is based entirely on these unsubstantiated speculations.
His conclusion is based upon pure speculation, not evidence.
Not Theories, Unsubstantiated Hyposthesis 4
2. Continued Sample Quotes and Claims
16) "If there were lipidlike molecules on the early Earth," says Deamer, "there
must have been membranes that would have predated life. They would have been
just hanging around there as little bubbles until something came along to inhabit
them." These bubbles might have engulfed early molecules that had the crude
ability to replicate. The liposomes would thus be able to protect them from their
harsh surroundings and concentrate them so that they could react (and evolve)
quickly and efficiently. - Discover article
- NOTE: Although it remains an "if" whether or not lipidlike molecules were
around on the early earth, the author concludes that if they were, they would have
functioned as membranes protecting early cells.
17) When he returned to Davis, Deamer pursued the "membrane first" hypothesis,
experimenting with mixtures of three compounds researchers believed existed on
the early Earth: fatty acids, glycerol, and phosphates. - Discover article
- NOTE: Speculation of what compounds may or may not have existed on early
earth form the basis of these experiments.
18) It seemed reasonable to think that these pools could have been the cradle for
genetic molecules, and it was likely that liposomes would have sloshed into the
pools as well. "All this organic stuff is accumulating on early beaches," Deamer
says, "and the sun is heating and drying it, and lots of natural experiments are
taking place that I'm trying to re-create in the laboratory." - Discover article
- NOTE: The first sentence is phrased in such a way as to clearly indicate the
speculative nature of the comment. Despite this, the second sentence conveys a
sort of narrative certainty for these events.
19) One substance they have isolated is nonanoic acid, a chain of nine carbons,
and they've managed to form membranes with it. Yet their membranes fall apart
sooner than the ones formed from Deamer's original stew, which suggests that the
true membrane formers are probably still hidden. - Discover article
- NOTE: This statement demonstrates the failure of the compounds mentioned to
form a sufficient membrane. Thus, the researchers are still left without any idea
what their speculative early membranes could have been formed from. Despite
this, they remain confident that some form of primitive membranes must have
been available.
20) PAHs are unpleasant stuff--you can find them coming out of almost any
tailpipe--but they may have made life possible on early Earth. - Discover article
21) It's possible, Deamer thinks, that in a similar manner PAHs could have
supplied energy to early cells. - Discover article
- NOTE: Concerning what may have provided energy for the hypothetical proto-
4
cells, the author can only offer speculations about PAH's, both in regard to their
availability and their capacity to fill this need.
3. Summary About Quotations
1) The modern scientific view that life originated from unintelligent forces:
a) A winding, ever-growing stack of untested hypothetical speculations and
unfounded speculation.
b) Begins with the assumption that life can come from unintelligent causes and
concludes the same without any empirical support. In between their initial
presumption and their circular conclusion is just a string of unsubstantiated
hypotheses.
2) The confidence that modern scientists, Atheists, and Agnostics have in these
hypothetical speculations is completely unfounded.
3) From the scientific community's own words and language, the strength of the
"life from unintelligent forces" hypothesis is mainly derived from the
presumed and prejudicial prohibition of the hypothesis that life came from
intelligent agency.
Scientists: Life on Earth Imported from Outer Space
4. Scientists now believe that life on earth had to originate from some other
planetary body.
- Atheism, Agnosticism, and all of naturalistic (atheistic) evolutionary theory now
hang on the notion that life on earth as we know it DID NOT come about from the
evolution of a living cell on this planet (earth), but from the evolution of a living
cell on another planet that came here most likely through a meteor shower of
some kind.
- The hypothesis that life on earth came from outer space, is now a major premise
in the scientific search for an unintelligent explanation for the origins of life.
5. Quotes on Life from Outer Space
1) On the other hand, it is believed that our young planet, still in the throes of
volcanic eruptions and battered by falling comets and asteroids, remained
inhospitable to life for about half a billion years after its birth, together with the
rest of the solar system, some 4.55 billion years ago. This leaves a window of
perhaps 200-300 million years for the appearance of life on earth.
This duration was once considered too short for the emergence of something
as complex as a living cell. Hence suggestions were made that germs of life may
have come to earth from outer space with cometary dust or even, as proposed by
Francis Crick of DNA double-helix fame, on a spaceship sent out by some distant
civilization. - American Scientist article
- NOTE: The reason that scientists now assume that life on earth had to be
imported from some other planetary body (perhaps even via a space ship) is that
earth's history involved major cataclysmic events that would make it
impossible for life to have evolved on earth.
2) Astronomers and geologists were discovering that Earth had a violent
infancy--hundreds of millions of years after the planet had formed, giant
asteroids and comets still crashed into it, burning off its young atmosphere and
boiling away its oceans. In the process, they also destroyed all the chemicals that
5
researchers assumed were in liberal supply on the early Earth, including the
building blocks of lipids.
Research now suggests that the source was extraterrestrial. Comets and
meteorites evidently brought seeds of creation to replace the ones they had
destroyed, in the form of hundreds of different organic carbon molecules
synthesized when the solar system was a swirling disk of gas and dust. After the
last atmosphere-killing impacts--about 4 billion years ago--smaller comets,
meteorites, and dust from space could, in the space of a few hundred million
years, have brought enough organic carbon to cover the planet in a layer ten
inches deep.
Deamer wondered whether space could also supply him with his membranes;
specifically, he wondered whether he could dig them out of a 200-pound meteorite
that had fallen in Murchison, Australia, in 1969 and that was positively tarry with
organic carbon. In 1985 he traveled to Australian National University in
Canberra to study it. "The question was," he says, "are there any things in the
meteor that form bilayers?" If so, it would be fair to assume that after impacts of
similar meteorites in the ocean billions of years ago, such substances could have
washed up onshore in a tide pool, dried, and then been rehydrated.
Deamer ground a piece of the Murchison meteorite and extracted the organic
carbon, made it into a slurry, dried it, and then added water again. "I took that
ordinary extract and put it on a slide; I didn't know what I was going to see. It
was a wonderful surprise--the whole slide began to fill with these beautiful little
vesicles. I started taking pictures immediately. It's like what they say about seeing
a UFO--you want to get your shots in. I can remember running downstairs to a
lunch group of my colleagues and showing the pictures, and they looked at them
and said, From meteorites?' It was pretty hard to believe." - Discover article
- NOTE: According to this longer description, the early history of the earth
involved bombardments from meteors and such which would have followed
any initial developments of life on this planet, and which would have destroyed
any such developments in the process. Both of these two quotes also clarify
that, due to these series of cataclysms, a long enough time frame would not be
available for life to originate on earth. Thus, life on earth, must have fallen
from the heavens, as the following two quotes also exemplify.
3) To what extent these substances arose on earth or were brought in by the
falling comets and asteroids that contributed to the final accretion of our planet is
still being debated. - American Scientist article
4) Deamer was encouraged by this work--he had found hints that meteorites
supplied material to form membranes that could have enclosed complex genetic
molecules and could have trapped energy. - Discover article
5) The clues come from the earth, from outer space, from laboratory experiments,
and, especially, from life itself. - American Scientist article
6) The final demystification of organic chemistry has been achieved by the
exploration of outer space. - American Scientist article
7) That such processes indeed take place is demonstrated by the presence of
amino acids and other biologically significant compounds on celestial bodies--for
example, the meteorite that fell in 1969 in Murchison, Australia, Comet Halley
6
(which could be analyzed during its recent passage by means of instruments
carried on a spacecraft), and Saturn's satellite Titan, the seas of which are
believed to be made of hydrocarbons. - American Scientist article
8) The first hints that this might be so came from the laboratory, before evidence
for it was found in space, through the historic experiments of Stanley Miller, now
recalled in science textbooks. - American Scientist article
9) Although the primitive atmosphere is no longer believed to be as rich in
hydrogen as once thought by Urey, the discovery that the Murchison meteorite
contains the same amino acids obtained by Miller, and even in the same relative
proportions, suggests strongly that his results are relevant. - American Scientist
article
10) According to most experts who have considered the problem--notably, in
relation with the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence project--there should
be plenty of such sites, perhaps as many as one million per galaxy. If these
experts are right, and if I am correct, there must be about as many foci of life in
the universe. Life is a cosmic imperative. The universe is awash with life. American Scientist article
- NOTE: The above series of similar quotes (5-10) all indicate that scientific
theory incorporates the notion that life arose on some other planetary body and
then came to earth.
Atheisms Circle of Reasons
6. Circular Reasoning:
- Atheists often charge that Theists employ circular reasoning by first assuming
God exists and then end by concluding this very same thing, that God exists.
- Atheists:
a) begin by assuming that life came about through unintelligent forces, then
b) resist considering any alternative to this assumption,
c) dismiss any shred of evidence that might indicate otherwise, and
d) end up with the not-so-surprising conclusion that life came from unintelligent
causation.
7. Quotes of Atheists employing circular reasoning
1) It is now generally agreed that if life arose spontaneously by natural
processes--a necessary assumption if we wish to remain within the realm of
science--it must have arisen fairly quickly, more in a matter of millennia or
centuries, perhaps even less, than in millions of years. - American Scientist article
- NOTE: As this quote demonstrates, scientists define intelligent agency as
being outside of the realm of science right from the start. Thus, in refusing to
consider the alternative, they force themselves to conclude the assumption
they made from the very start.
- NOTE: It is the job of science to find out what is true. This is an unfair and
blinding approach to science because if life was perhaps created by intelligent
design, this approach would prohibit us from discovering that fact.
2) An important rule in this exercise is to reconstruct the earliest events in life's
history without assuming they proceeded with the benefit of foresight. Every step
must be accounted for in terms of antecedent and concomitant events. Each must
7
stand on its own and cannot be viewed as a preparation for things to come. Any
hint of teleology must be avoided. - American Scientist article
- NOTE: Once again, we see that scientists as a rule will ignore or disregard any
hint of intelligent agency during their observation of nature and experimentation.
3) The synthesis of urea by Friedrich W‰hler in 1828 is usually hailed as the
first proof that a special "vital force" is not needed for organic syntheses.
Lingering traces of a vitalistic mystique nevertheless long remained associated
with organic chemistry, seen as a special kind of life-dependent chemistry that
only human ingenuity could equate. The final demystification of organic
chemistry has been achieved by the exploration of outer space. - American
Scientist article
- NOTE: This quote exemplifies how it is the goal of science to find an
alternative to the apparent notion that life would require causation similar to
human ingenuity.
4) The development of RNA replication must have been the second stage in the
evolution of the RNA world. The problem is not as simple as might appear at first
glance. Attempts at engineering--with considerably more foresight and
technical support than the prebiotic world could have enjoyed--an RNA
molecule capable of catalyzing RNA replication have failed so far. - American
Scientist article
5) It seems very unlikely that protometabolism produced just the four bases found
in RNA, A, U, G and C, ready by some remarkable coincidence to engage in
pairing and allow replication. Chemistry does not have this kind of foresight. In
all likelihood, the four bases arose together with a number of other substances
similarly constructed of one or more rings containing carbon and nitrogen. American Scientist article
- NOTE: As indicated by Quote No. 2, foresight implies purpose and purpose,
would in turn, imply intelligent causation. So, once again, the two above quotes
demonstrate that when the observation of nature seems to indicate the
involvement of foresight in natural processes, scientists reject that notion and
then come up with alternate hypothesis to make foresight unnecessary.
6) It also seems likely that life would arise anywhere similar conditions are found
because many successive steps are involved. A single, freak, highly improbable
event can conceivably happen. Many highly improbable events--drawing a
winning lottery number or the distribution of playing cards in a hand of bridge-happen all the time. But a string of improbable events--the same lottery number
being drawn twice, or the same bridge hand being dealt twice in a row--does not
happen naturally. - American Scientist article
7) Life is a cosmic imperative. The universe is awash with life. - American
Scientist article
- NOTE: These two quotes demonstrates that the scientific conclusion that life
must be common in the universe is derived from the assumption that life on
earth cannot be a unique or special occurrence, as that might imply
intelligent causation.
- NOTE: Additionally, if life is unique to earth, that would also demonstrate
8
the extreme improbability of life coming about by natural forces, which
would again point to intelligent intervention to overcome poor probability.
8. Summary on “Atheisms Circle of Reasons”
a) Science begins by prohibiting intelligent agency from being a possible
explanation for life and ends with concluding that intelligent agency is not
necessary to explain the origin of life.
b) The scientific prohibition of intelligent agency is so complete that scientists
will come up with an endless string of un-testable and unverifiable hypothesis
(which they refer to as Theories) just to provide any possible alternative
explanation to intelligent causation, including that life came from Outer Space.
Is God a White Crow?
9. The metaphor of crows will often be described as an illustration to the limitations
of induction.
a) Based upon the fact that every individual instance of a crow that we observe
involves a black crow, we would have to induce that as a rule, all crows are black.
b) However, just one white crow would disprove that rule.
c) We cannot simply assume the existence of white crows, so we must maintain
our conclusion that all crows are black until or unless a white crow is observed.
10. In this example, the white crow represents something new and unknown. We
have no reason to suspect that a white crow exists since we've never seen one.
11. Question:
- Is God a white crow?
- Does concluding God exists mean we are supposing something new and
unknown?
12. The Theistic conclusion that God exists does NOT hypothesize something that is
new and unknown to us. All of the qualities found in the fundamental
definition of God are traits we know exist. Theism does not assume the
existence of anything that we do not already know either from logic or empirical
experience.
a) First, God is said to be eternal.
- It is patently illogical to think that something came from nothing.
- Since something exists now, it cannot be said that there was a time when nothing
existed.
- Anything that had a beginning would need a cause.
- If nothing is eternal then we arrive at the logical fallacy of infinite regress,
which is a fallacy precisely because, by definition it lacks a sufficient explanation.
- The only way to avoid infinite regress is to have a cause that had no beginning
and so, requires no cause of its own.
- Such a cause would have no beginning, it would be eternal.
- So, the existence of an eternal cause is a logical necessity for explaining the
existence of the universe.
- Occam's Razor would prohibit us from multiplying causes endlessly when a
singular cause would suffice, and a single cause does suffice as an explanation if
that single cause is eternal.
- On the contrary, an endless series of causes is, by definition, not sufficient to
9
explain the universe's existence, no matter how many non-eternal causes it
contains.
- Anything that exists outside our universe would be unavailable for direct
empirical observation.
- CONCLUSION: We know as a matter of logical necessity that something
eternal exists (that is unavailable for direct empirical observation).
b) Second, we know that intelligence exists.
- There are many fields of science and industry, which deal with detecting
intelligent agency: 1) forensics, 2) forensic medicine, 3) cryptography, 4)
archeology, 5) psychology, 6) some aspects of zoology, 7) intellectual property
law, and even 8) insurance claim investigation - just to name a few.
- We can look at our fellow human beings and discern the difference between a
human mind and a rock, a snail, or even a computer.
- CONCLUSION: We know intelligence exists.
13. The question is whether or not the concept of intelligence necessarily needs to
be applied to the other two logically known concepts: 1. an eternal cause 2.
that we cannot directly empirically observe.
- In order to justify the conclusion that the First Cause is intelligent, all that is
necessary is to demonstrate some aspect of the universe for which there exists no
identifiable unintelligent intermediate cause – the origin of life.
- Until or unless scientists can identify the unintelligent mechanism, which causes
basic molecules to assemble and reproduce themselves as a living cell, the only
mechanism we have seen capable of engineering such an accomplishment is the
intelligent agency of the scientists themselves working in the lab toward the
creation of a living cell from non-living material.
14. “Is God a white crow?” CONCLUSIONS:
a) The concept of God is not a white crow, but a collection of black crows and
the refusal to assume the existence of any white crows.
- Black crows – (God is merely a combination of things we already know exist):
1) an eternal cause, 2) which is unavailable to empirical detection, and 3) is
intelligent.
- White crows – (Theists conclude that God exists because we refuse to assume
the existence of things we have not empirically detected): a) such as unintelligent
causes, which create life from non-living materials.)
STUDY CONCLUSIONS
1.) Until or unless scientists can identify the unintelligent
mechanism, which causes basic molecules to assemble and
reproduce themselves as a living cell we must induce that as a
general rule unintelligent causes are insufficient to create life.
2.) b) There exists no identifiable explanatory mechanism for the
existence of life in the universe other than intelligent agency so
we must associate intelligence with the First Cause, (the eternal
cause that we cannot directly empirically observe.)
10
11