Unlocking the Legitimacy of Design in Evolution: Exploring Chapter 9 Truths

Is the Design Explanation Legitimate?

The design explanation is a legitimate way to understand the complexity of life. While many evolutionists dismiss creation as unscientific and religious, it is important to consider whether there are observable effects or evidence of design in the living world. In this chapter, we will discuss the criteria used in everyday life to determine whether something has been designed and apply them to living organisms. We will also examine whether design is a valid explanation for the complexity of life or if naturalistic causes should be prioritized.

How do we detect design?

We often detect intelligent design in our daily lives. For example, if we find arrowheads on a desert island, we can safely assume that they were made by someone, even if we cannot see the designer. There is a clear difference between writing by an intelligent person, such as Shakespeare's plays, and a random letter sequence like "WDLMNLTDTJBKWIRZREZLMQCOP." Similarly, there is a distinction between Shakespeare's works and a repetitive sequence like "ABCDABCDABCD." The former demonstrates specified complexity, while the latter only shows order.

We can also differentiate between messages written in sand and the results of wave and wind action. The carved heads of U.S. presidents on Mount Rushmore clearly demonstrate specified complexity, unlike erosional features. Even in the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) program, scientists look for signals from outer space with high levels of specified complexity to determine if there is an intelligent sender. Random or repetitive sequences do not provide evidence of intelligence. It is essential to recognize that biases and assumptions can influence interpretations of data.

Life fits the design criterion

Life exhibits high specified complexity, which distinguishes it from non-living objects like crystals. Living organisms, such as proteins and DNA, have high specified complexity because they contain specific arrangements of complex molecules that perform specific functions. While crystals have an ordered structure, they lack the specified complexity found in living things. The difference between a crystal and DNA is like the difference between a book containing repeated letters and a book of Shakespeare. Unfortunately, some evolutionists fail to acknowledge the connection between specified complexity and design.

Additionally, the information content of living things far surpasses that of Shakespeare's writings. Richard Dawkins, an atheist biologist, explains that there is enough information capacity in a single human cell to store the entire Encyclopedia Britannica several times over. If it is unreasonable to believe that an encyclopedia could originate without intelligence, it is just as unreasonable to believe that life could have originated without intelligence.

Furthermore, living organisms possess intricate machinery that requires specific parts to function properly. Biochemist Michael Behe coined the term "irreducible complexity" to describe systems that cannot work if any component is removed. For example, a mousetrap will not function without all its essential parts. Many structures in living organisms exhibit irreducible complexity, surpassing even man-made machines in complexity. These systems include vision and blood-clotting mechanisms, which rely on multiple components working together.

A simple cell?

Even the simplest cell is incredibly complex, containing vast amounts of specific information. Mycoplasma genitalium, the organism with the smallest known genome, possesses 482 genes comprising 580,000 base pairs. However, these genes can only function within a pre-existing cellular system that includes translational and replicating machinery and a cell membrane. Mycoplasma relies on other more complex organisms for necessary nutrients, indicating that a more complex initial organism must have existed.

Recent efforts to determine the minimum requirements for a living cell calculated that at least 256 genes would be necessary. However, such a hypothetical organism would struggle to survive due to limited DNA repair capabilities, reduced ability to fine-tune gene expression, limited ability to digest complex compounds, and dependence on an abundant supply of organic nutrients. The complexity of even the simplest cell points to the insurmountable challenges that undirected chemical reactions face in producing life.

Can mutations generate information?

Even if we grant evolutionists the existence of the first cell, the problem remains of generating significant amounts of new information to account for the diversity and complexity of life. The examples of "contemporary evolution" presented by proponents of evolution largely involve the loss of information rather than the generation of new information.

Biophysicist Dr. Lee Spetner, who taught information and communication theory, states that he has never found a mutation that adds information. All point mutations studied on a molecular level have resulted in a reduction of genetic information rather than an increase. While mutations can confer benefits such as antibiotic or pesticide resistance, these changes are typically due to loss or transfer of existing genetic information and never result in the creation of new information. Evolutionists often point to examples like wingless beetles or antibiotic resistance as evidence of evolution, but these cases involve a loss or modification of existing traits, not the generation of new traits.

Would any evidence convince evolutionists?

Evolutionists often dismiss design as unscientific and refuse to consider it as a valid explanation for the complexity of life. However, renowned British evolutionist J.B.S. Haldane acknowledged that certain mechanisms, such as wheels or magnets, would be impossible to explain through gradual evolution. Recent discoveries have indeed shown the existence of complex molecular motors in living organisms, such as the rotary motor driving the flagellum of bacteria or the enzyme responsible for ATP production.

Other marvels of design include trilobite eyes with precise lens designs, lobster eyes serving as models for NASA X-ray telescopes, and the sonar systems found in dolphins and bats. These examples fulfill Haldane's criteria for demonstrating evolution to be false. However, many evolutionists remain closed off to the idea of intelligent design, even in the face of overwhelming evidence.

Why This Matters

Understanding the legitimacy of design as an explanation for the complexity of life is crucial for critically evaluating evolutionary claims. Recognizing the presence of specified complexity and information content in living organisms provides a powerful argument for the existence of a Creator. It challenges the materialistic worldview that often excludes design a priori. By considering the evidence for design, Christians can engage in informed discussions about the origin and complexity of life.

Think About It

If living organisms exhibit high specified complexity and information content, what does this imply about their origins? How does this challenge the belief that life could have originated through undirected natural processes? Consider the implications of irreducible complexity and the challenges faced by mutations in generating new information. Reflect on how recognizing design as a legitimate explanation for complexity affects your understanding of God's role in creation.