Day 33.

Our bias determines how we will interpret the evidence.

Whispering Eternity #33. In the world today we see more efficient microchips and computers appearing all the time. Yet the common ordinary seed for a huge tree, measuring just a few millimetres, carries all the plant data and specifications for the future tree’s appearance, behaviour, size, shape of the branches, leaves and trunk, colour, reactions to heat, cold, rain, light, drought, seasonal adjustments, reproduction, chemical composition of cell sap, the disposition of various type of tissue, the survival techniques in various environments, all the chemical processes of growth, photo tropism, photosynthesis and a myriad of other things.

How many megabytes would an ordinary computer require to do that, what large storage capacity would a modern computer need to reproduce the act of a seed? A seed is an incredible computer and I can’t believe that it is the product of natural selection or genetic mutation. Blind processes do not produce computers this size.

Before I did my degree in theology, and while I was working on a degree in agriculture with a major in biology, I had a fair hammering in the evolutionary process. I loved biology and I was impressed by the power and beauty of nature. We are told that nature is God’s second book. As I listened to the lecturer’s explanations for eons upon eons of evolution as the origin of my existence, I was struck by the reality of how little we know and that they were only talking about a theory. In the end it comes down to your bias as to how you interpret the evidence. It comes down to whether we put our faith in evolution or God. Much of the “evidence” for evolution, the fossil record, sedimentary layers and so on, to a creationist, becomes evidence for the universal flood talked about in Genesis. Our bias determines how we interpret the evidence. I was now biased towards a creator God.

Even when they provide impressive data to back their assumptions concerning origins, even when laboratory experiments can demonstrate the mechanisms of evolution, it does not prove that this scenario they are describing is in fact what actually transpired. It could have happened in a variety of ways and it is therefore wiser to put our trust in the one who witnessed it all, rather than those who speculate as to how it may have happened. Yes, natural selection is an observable fact. A species will adapt to its environment and change. This is micro evolution. There is however not a shred of evidence, in the end, for one species becoming another. Adaptation and natural selection do not turn monkeys into men. Have you ever wondered why we still have monkeys if they turned into men millions of years ago? Maybe the similarities just demonstrate the same architect, who happened to have a sense of humour and so produced a parody of the human race to amuse us.