Part 4: Irreducible Complexity
Over 100 years ago, Darwin thought a single living cell was simply a bunch of protoplasm. But molecular biology, in recent years, has proven him wrong. We now know that this ‘simple’ cell bristles with high tech molecular machinery far more complex than anything we humans have produced. For example…
— the tiny string like flagellum attached like a tail to some bacteria. The flagellum acts like a propeller. It comes equipped with a hook joint, a drive shaft, O-rings and a bi-directional acid powered motor that operates at 100,000 revolutions per minute (RPM’s). This flagellum requires dozens of precisely tailored intricately interacting parts, which cannot form by any gradual process. The flagellum has many coordinated parts that must come together all at one time, in one place and combined and coordinated in the right patterns for the molecular machine to function at all. The biologist David DeRosier says, “More so than other motors, it resembles tiny molecular machines designed by humans”. This part is an example of ‘irreducible complexity’. In other words, if one part doesn’t work, the whole cell won’t work.
A simple example of this is the mouse trap. You cannot start with a wooden base only and catch a mouse…then add a spring and catch a few more mice. No, all the parts have to be assembled at once or the whole thing won’t work and you won’t catch any mice at all.
Darwin understood this principle and realized it contradicted his theory of small, gradual steps in forming new things. He said, “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down”.
An ‘aggregate’ structure, like a pile of sand, can be built up gradually by just adding more sand. But an ‘organized’ structure, like the inside of a computer, is built up according to an existing plan. Each piece is structured to contribute to the functioning of the unit only when everything is in place. Without that plan, the unit would never exist. Without all the parts completely assembled and functioning, the unit wouldn’t work.
Fine tuning of the Universe:
In the last few years, scientists have discovered that the cosmos itself is exquisitely fine-tuned to support life. Cosmologists have discovered that these fundamental forces are balanced on a knife’s edge, so to speak. What are these forces? Take some time to read them by going to http://godandscience.org/apologetics/designun.html and scrolling down to ‘Fine Tuning Parameters for the Universe’. You’ll see forces like gravity, the strong & weak nuclear forces, the electro-magnetic force, etc. There are at least 122 of these parameters. You’ll see that an extremely small variation in any one of these forces would preclude life from existing. Read what some scientists are saying about the fine-tuning of the universe at http://godandscience.org/apologetics/quotes.html.
But some scientists are still trying to get around the fact that the universe had a beginning. They propose a multi-verse. That’s where there’s a universe-making “machine” that’s popping out trillions and trillions of universes and one of them (our universe) just happened to have all the right conditions to support life. Forget the fact that there’s absolutely no proof of this multi-verse at all. And the odds of it popping out the ‘right’ universe are about zero. This is where a scientist’s pre-supposition comes into play. They’re naturalism prohibits them from acknowledging a Creator and they’ll go to extreme, fanatical lengths to deny one.
For His Kingdom,
Dave Maynard
http://BSSSB-LLC.com