"We therefore have in the genetic code an immensely complex instruction
manual that has been majestically designed by a more intelligent source than
human beings."
From: www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn58/tinycode.htm
DNA: The Tiny Code That's Toppling Evolution As scientists explore a new
universe—the universe inside the cell—they are making startling discoveries
of information systems more complex than anything ever devised by humanity's
best minds. How did they get there, and what does it mean for the theory of
evolution? by Mario Seiglie
Two great achievements occurred in 1953, more than half a century ago.
The first was the successful ascent of Mt. Everest, the highest mountain in
the world. Sir Edmund Hillary and his guide, Tenzing Norgay, reached the
summit that year, an accomplishment that's still considered the ultimate
feat for mountain climbers. Since then, more than a thousand mountaineers
have made it to the top, and each year hundreds more attempt it.
Yet the second great achievement of 1953 has had a greater impact on the
world. Each year, many thousands join the ranks of those participating in
this accomplishment, hoping to ascend to fame and fortune.
It was in 1953 that James Watson and Francis Crick achieved what appeared
impossible—discovering the genetic structure deep inside the nucleus of our
cells. We call this genetic material DNA, an abbreviation for
deoxyribonucleic acid.
The discovery of the double-helix structure of the DNA molecule opened the
floodgates for scientists to examine the code embedded within it. Now, more
than half a century after the initial discovery, the DNA code has been
deciphered—although many of its elements are still not well understood.
What has been found has profound implications regarding Darwinian evolution,
the theory taught in schools all over the world that all living beings have
evolved by natural processes through mutation and natural selection.
Amazing revelations about DNA
As scientists began to decode the human DNA molecule, they found something
quite unexpected—an exquisite 'language' composed of some 3 billion genetic
letters. "One of the most extraordinary discoveries of the twentieth
century," says Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Center for Science and
Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, Wash., "was that DNA actually
stores information—the detailed instructions for assembling proteins—in the
form of a four-character digital code" (quoted by Lee Strobel, The Case for
a Creator, 2004, p. 224).
It is hard to fathom, but the amount of information in human DNA is roughly
equivalent to 12 sets of The Encyclopaedia Britannica—an incredible 384
volumes" worth of detailed information that would fill 48 feet of library
shelves!
Yet in their actual size—which is only two millionths of a millimeter
thick—a teaspoon of DNA, according to molecular biologist Michael Denton,
could contain all the information needed to build the proteins for all the
species of organisms that have ever lived on the earth, and "there would
still be enough room left for all the information in every book ever
written" (Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 1996, p. 334).
Who or what could miniaturize such information and place this enormous
number of 'letters' in their proper sequence as a genetic instruction
manual? Could evolution have gradually come up with a system like this?
DNA contains a genetic language
Let's first consider some of the characteristics of this genetic 'language.'
For it to be rightly called a language, it must contain the following
elements: an alphabet or coding system, correct spelling, grammar (a proper
arrangement of the words), meaning (semantics) and an intended purpose.
Scientists have found the genetic code has all of these key elements. "The
coding regions of DNA," explains Dr. Stephen Meyer, "have exactly the same
relevant properties as a computer code or language" (quoted by Strobel, p.
237, emphasis in original).
The only other codes found to be true languages are all of human origin.
Although we do find that dogs bark when they perceive danger, bees dance to
point other bees to a source and whales emit sounds, to name a few examples
of other species" communication, none of these have the composition of a
language. They are only considered low-level communication signals.
The only types of communication considered high-level are human languages,
artificial languages such as computer and Morse codes and the genetic code.
No other communication system has been found to contain the basic
characteristics of a language.
Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft, commented that "DNA is like a software
program, only much more complex than anything we've ever devised."
Can you imagine something more intricate than the most complex program
running on a supercomputer being devised by accident through evolution—no
matter how much time, how many mutations and how much natural selection are
taken into account?
DNA language not the same as DNA molecule
Recent studies in information theory have come up with some astounding
conclusions—namely, that information cannot be considered in the same
category as matter and energy. It's true that matter or energy can carry
information, but they are not the same as information itself.
For instance, a book such as Homer's Iliad contains information, but is the
physical book itself information? No, the materials of the book—the paper,
ink and glue contain the contents, but they are only a means of transporting
it.
If the information in the book was spoken aloud, written in chalk or
electronically reproduced in a computer, the information does not suffer
qualitatively from the means of transporting it. "In fact the content of the
message," says professor Phillip Johnson, "is independent of the physical
makeup of the medium" (Defeating Darwinism by Opening Minds, 1997, p. 71).
The same principle is found in the genetic code. The DNA molecule carries
the genetic language, but the language itself is independent of its carrier.
The same genetic information can be written in a book, stored in a compact
disk or sent over the Internet, and yet the quality or content of the
message has not changed by changing the means of conveying it.
As George Williams puts it: "The gene is a package of information, not an
object. The pattern of base pairs in a DNA molecule specifies the gene. But
the DNA molecule is the medium, it's not the message" (quoted by Johnson, p.
70).
Information from an intelligent source
In addition, this type of high-level information has been found to originate
only from an intelligent source.
As Lee Strobel explains: "The data at the core of life is not disorganized,
it's not simply orderly like salt crystals, but it's complex and specific
information that can accomplish a bewildering task—the building of
biological machines that far outstrip human technological capabilities" (p.
244).
For instance, the precision of this genetic language is such that the
average mistake that is not caught turns out to be one error per 10 billion
letters. If a mistake occurs in one of the most significant parts of the
code, which is in the genes, it can cause a disease such as sickle-cell
anemia. Yet even the best and most intelligent typist in the world couldn't
come close to making only one mistake per 10 billion letters—far from it.
So to believe that the genetic code gradually evolved in Darwinian style
would break all the known rules of how matter, energy and the laws of nature
work. In fact, there has not been found in nature any example of one
information system inside the cell gradually evolving into another
functional information program.
Michael Behe, a biochemist and professor at Pennsylvania's Lehigh
University, explains that genetic information is primarily an instruction
manual and gives some examples.
He writes: "Consider a step-by-step list of [genetic] instructions. A
mutation is a change in one of the lines of instructions. So instead of
saying, "Take a 1/4-inch nut," a mutation might say, "Take a 3/8-inch nut."
Or instead of "Place the round peg in the round hole," we might get "Place
the round peg in the square hole" . . . What a mutation cannot do is change
all the instructions in one step—say, [providing instructions] to build a
fax machine instead of a radio" (Darwin's Black Box, 1996, p. 41).
We therefore have in the genetic code an immensely complex instruction
manual that has been majestically designed by a more intelligent source than
human beings.
Even one of the discoverers of the genetic code, the agnostic and recently
deceased Francis Crick, after decades of work on deciphering it, admitted
that "an honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could
only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to
be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have
been satisfied to get it going" (Life Itself, 1981, p. 88, emphasis added).
Evolution fails to provide answers
It is good to remember that, in spite of all the efforts of all the
scientific laboratories around the world working over many decades, they
have not been able to produce so much as a single human hair. How much more
difficult is it to produce an entire body consisting of some 100 trillion
cells!
Up to now, Darwinian evolutionists could try to counter their detractors
with some possible explanations for the complexity of life. But now they
have to face the information dilemma: How can meaningful, precise
information be created by accident—by mutation and natural selection? None
of these contain the mechanism of intelligence, a requirement for creating
complex information such as that found in the genetic code.
Darwinian evolution is still taught in most schools as though it were fact.
But it is increasingly being found wanting by a growing number of
scientists. "As recently as twenty-five years ago," says former atheist
Patrick Glynn, "a reasonable person weighing the purely scientific evidence
on the issue would likely have come down on the side of skepticism
[regarding a Creator]. That is no longer the case." He adds: "Today the
concrete data point strongly in the direction of the God hypothesis. It is
the simplest and most obvious solution . . ." (God: The Evidence, 1997, pp.
54-55, 53).
Quality of genetic information the same
Evolution tells us that through chance mutations and natural selection,
living things evolve. Yet to evolve means to gradually change certain
aspects of some living thing until it becomes another type of creature, and
this can only be done by changing the genetic information.
So what do we find about the genetic code? The same basic quality of
information exists in a humble bacteria or a plant as in a person. A
bacterium has a shorter genetic code, but qualitatively it gives
instructions as precisely and exquisitely as that of a human being. We find
the same prerequisites of a language—alphabet, grammar and semantics—in
simple bacteria and algae as in man.
Each cell with genetic information, from bacteria to man, according to
molecular biologist Michael Denton, consists of "artificial languages and
their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval,
elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and
components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality
control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and
modular construction . . . [and a] capacity not equalled in any of our most
advanced machines, for it would be capable of replicating its entire
structure within a matter of a few hours" (Denton, p. 329).
So how could the genetic information of bacteria gradually evolve into
information for another type of being, when only one or a few minor mistakes
in the millions of letters in that bacterium's DNA can kill it?
Again, evolutionists are uncharacteristically silent on the subject. They
don't even have a working hypothesis about it. Lee Strobel writes: "The six
feet of DNA coiled inside every one of our body's one hundred trillion cells
contains a four-letter chemical alphabet that spells out precise assembly
instructions for all the proteins from which our bodies are made . . . No
hypothesis has come close to explaining how information got into biological
matter by naturalistic means" (Strobel, p. 282).
Werner Gitt, professor of information systems, puts it succinctly: "The
basic flaw of all evolutionary views is the origin of the information in
living beings. It has never been shown that a coding system and semantic
information could originate by itself [through matter] . . . The information
theorems predict that this will never be possible. A purely material origin
of life is thus [ruled out]" (Gitt, p. 124).
The clincher
Besides all the evidence we have covered for the intelligent design of DNA
information, there is still one amazing fact remaining—the ideal number of
genetic letters in the DNA code for storage and translation.
Moreover, the copying mechanism of DNA, to meet maximum effectiveness,
requires the number of letters in each word to be an even number. Of all
possible mathematical combinations, the ideal number for storage and
transcription has been calculated to be four letters.
This is exactly what has been found in the genes of every living thing on
earth—a four-letter digital code. As Werner Gitt states: "The coding system
used for living beings is optimal from an engineering standpoint. This fact
strengthens the argument that it was a case of purposeful design rather that
a [lucky] chance" (Gitt, p. 95).
More witnesses
Back in Darwin's day, when his book On the Origin of Species was published
in 1859, life appeared much simpler. Viewed through the primitive
microscopes of the day, the cell appeared to be but a simple blob of jelly
or uncomplicated protoplasm. Now, almost 150 years later, that view has
changed dramatically as science has discovered a virtual universe inside the
cell.
"It was once expected," writes Professor Behe, "that the basis of life would
be exceedingly simple. That expectation has been smashed. Vision, motion,
and other biological functions have proven to be no less sophisticated than
television cameras and automobiles. Science has made enormous progress in
understanding how the chemistry of life works, but the elegance and
complexity of biological systems at the molecular level have paralyzed
science's attempt to explain their origins" (Behe, p. x).
Dr. Meyer considers the recent discoveries about DNA as the Achilles" heel
of evolutionary theory. He observes: "Evolutionists are still trying to
apply Darwin's nineteenth-century thinking to a twenty-first century
reality, and it's not working ... I think the information revolution taking
place in biology is sounding the death knell for Darwinism and chemical
evolutionary theories" (quoted by Strobel, p. 243).
Dr. Meyer's conclusion? "I believe that the testimony of science supports
theism. While there will always be points of tension or unresolved conflict,
the major developments in science in the past five decades have been running
in a strongly theistic direction" (ibid., p. 77).
Dean Kenyon, a biology professor who repudiated his earlier book on
Darwinian evolution—mostly due to the discoveries of the information found
in DNA—states: "This new realm of molecular genetics (is) where we see the
most compelling evidence of design on the Earth" (ibid., p. 221).
Just recently, one of the world's most famous atheists, Professor Antony
Flew, admitted he couldn't explain how DNA was created and developed through
evolution. He now accepts the need for an intelligent source to have been
involved in the making of the DNA code.
"What I think the DNA material has done is show that intelligence must have
been involved in getting these extraordinary diverse elements together," he
said (quoted by Richard Ostling, "Leading Atheist Now Believes in God,"
Associated Press report, Dec. 9, 2004).
"Fearfully and wonderfully made"
Although written thousands of years ago, King David's words about our
marvelous human bodies still ring true. He wrote: "For You formed my inward
parts, You covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am
fearfully and wonderfully made . . . My frame was not hidden from You, when
I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought. . ." (Psalm 139:13-15,
emphasis added).
Where does all this leave evolution? Michael Denton, an agnostic scientist,
concludes: "Ultimately the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less
than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century" (Denton, p. 358).
All of this has enormous implications for our society and culture. Professor
Johnson makes this clear when he states: "Every history of the twentieth
century lists three thinkers as preeminent in influence: Darwin, Marx and
Freud. All three were regarded as 'scientific' (and hence far more reliable
than anything 'religious') in their heyday.
"Yet Marx and Freud have fallen, and even their dwindling bands of followers
no longer claim that their insights were based on any methodology remotely
comparable to that of experimental science. I am convinced that Darwin is
next on the block. His fall will be by far the mightiest of the three"
(Johnson, p. 113).
Evolution has had its run for almost 150 years in the schools and
universities and in the press. But now, with the discovery of what the DNA
code is all about, the complexity of the cell, and the fact that information
is something vastly different from matter and energy, evolution can no
longer dodge the ultimate outcome. The evidence certainly points to a
resounding checkmate for evolution! ~ GN ~