watchtower: the origin of life - five questions worth asking - 2010

8/20/2019 Watchtower: The Origin of Life - Five Questions Worth Asking - 2010

1/16

(Box) How Fast Can a CellReproduce?

15. Origin of Mitochondria and Hydro-

genosomes, by William F. Martin and

Mikl ´ os M

¨ uller, 2007, p. 21.

16. Brain Matters—Translating Research Into Classroom Practice, by Pat Wolfe,

2001, p. 16.

3. Where Did the InstructionsCome From?

17. Research News Berkeley Lab, (http:

//www.lbl.gov/Science-Articles/Archive/LSD-molecular-DNA.html), article:

“Molecular DNA Switch Found to Bethe Same for All Life,” contact: Lynn

Yarris, p. 1 of 4; accessed 2/10/2009.

18. Life Script, by Nicholas Wade, 2001,p. 79.

19. Bioinformatics Methods in Clinical

Research, edited by Rune Matthiesen,2010, p. 49.

20. Scientific American, “ComputingWith DNA,” by Leonard M. Adleman,

August 1998, p. 61.

21. Nano Letters, “Enumeration of DNA Molecules Bound to a Nanomechanical

Oscillator,” by B. Ilic, Y. Yang, K. Au-bin, R. Reichenbach, S. Krylov, and

H. G. Craighead, Vol. 5, No. 5, 2005,pp. 925, 929.

22. Genome—The Autobiography of a

Species in 23 Chapters, by Matt Ridley,

1999, pp. 7-8.

23. Essential Cell Biology, Second Edi-tion, by Bruce Alberts, Dennis Bray,

Karen Hopkin, Alexander Johnson,

Julian Lewis, Martin Raff, Keith Rob-erts, and Peter Walter, 2004, p. 201.

24. Molecular Biology of the Cell, FourthEdition, by Bruce Alberts et al, 2002,

p. 258.

25. No Ordinary Genius—The Illustrated Richard Feynman, edited by Christopher

Sykes, 1994, photo with no page numbersupplied; note caption.

a. New Scientist, “Second Genesis

—Life, but Not As We Know It,” by Bob Holmes, March 11, 2009, (http://

www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126990.100) accessed 3/11/2009.

26. The Search for Extraterrestrial Intel- ligence—A Philosophical Inquiry, by DavidLamb, 2001, p. 83.

27. Associated Press Newswires, “Fa-mous Atheist Now Believes in God,” by Richard N. Ostling, December 9, 2004.

(Box) A Molecule That Can BeRead and Copied

28. Intelligent Life in the Universe, SecondEdition, by Peter Ulmschneider, 2006,p. 125.

4. Has All Life Descended Froma Common Ancestor?

29. Biology and Philosophy, “The Con-cept of Monophyly: A Speculative Es-say,” by Malcolm S. Gordon, 1999,

p. 335.30. New Scientist, “Uprooting Darwin’sTree,” by Graham Lawton, January 24,2009, p. 34.

31. New Scientist, January 24, 2009,pp. 37, 39.

32. Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, “Conflicts Between Darwinand Paleontology,” by David M. Raup,January 1979, p. 23.

33. Archaeology, “The Origin of Form Was Abrupt Not Gradual,”by Suzan Mazur, October 11, 2008,(www.archaeology.org/online/interviews/newman.html),accessed 2/23/2009.

34. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life,by Henry Gee, 1999, p. 23.

35. Biology and Philosophy, p. 340.36. National Geographic, “Fossil Evi-dence,” November 2004, p. 25.

37. The Evolutionists—The Struggle for Darwin’s Soul, by Richard Morris, 2001,pp. 104-105.

(Box) What About HumanEvolution?

38. The Human Lineage, by Matt Cart-mill and Fred H. Smith, 2009, Preface,p. xi.

39. Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New Per- spectives on Human Evolution, by CharlesE. Oxnard, 1987, Preface, pp. xi, xii.

a. From Lucy to Language, by Donald Jo-hanson and Blake Edgar, 1996, p. 22.

b. Anthropologie, XLII/1, “Palaeodemog-raphy and Dental Microwear of Homo

Habilis From East Africa,” by Laura M.Mart

´ ınez, Jordi Galbany, and Alejandro

P ´ erez-P

´ erez, 2004, p. 53.

c. In Search of Deep Time—Beyond the Fossil Record to a New History of Life,

p. 22.

40. Critique of Anthropology, Vol-ume 29(2), “Patenting Hominins—Tax-onomies, Fossils and Egos,” by RobinDerricourt, 2009, pp. 195-196, 198.

41. Nature, “A New Species of Great Ape From the Late Miocene Epoch inEthiopia,” by Gen Suwa, Reiko T. Kono,Shigehiro Katoh, Berhane Asfaw,and Yonas Beyene, August 23, 2007,p. 921.

42. Acta Biologica Szegediensis, Vol-ume 46(1-2), “New Findings—New Prob-lems in Classification of Hominids,”by Gyula Gyenis, 2002, pp. 57, 59.

43. New Scientist, “A Fine Fossil—But aMissing Link She’s Not,” by Chris Bead,May 30, 2009, p. 18.

44. The Guardian, London, “FossilIda: Extraordinary Find Is ‘Missing Link’in Human Evolution,” by James Rander-son, May 19, 2009, (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2009/may/19/ida-fossil-missing-link),accessed 8/25/2009.

45. New Scientist, May 30, 2009,pp. 18-19.

46. Critique of Anthropology, Vol-ume 29(2), p. 202.

47. Science and Justice, Vol. 43, No. 4,(2003) section, Forensic Anthropology,

“Anthropological Facial ‘Reconstruc-tion’—Recognizing the Fallacies, ‘Unem-bracing’ the Errors, and Realizing Meth-od Limits,” by C. N. Stephan, p. 195.

48. The Human Fossil Record—VolumeThree, by Ralph L. Holloway, Douglas C.Broadfield, and Michael S. Yuan, 2004,Preface xvi.

49. Scientific American Mind, “Intelli-gence Evolved,” by Ursula Dicke and

Gerhard Roth, August/September 2008,p. 72.

50. American Journal of Physical Anthro- pology, “How Neandertals Inform Hu-man Variation,” by Milford H. Wolpoff,2009, p. 91.

51. Conceptual Issues in Human ModernOrigins Research, Editors G. A. Clark and C. M. Willermet, 1997, pp. 5, 60.

a. Wonderful Life—The Burgess Shale and the Nature of History, by Stephen Jay Gould, 1989, p. 28.

lf -E

THE ORIGIN OF LIFEFIVE QUESTIONS WORTH ASKING


2/16

THE ORIGIN OF LIFEFIVE QUESTIONS WORTH ASKING

QUESTION

1 How Did Life Begin? PAGE 4

QUESTION 2 Is Any Form of Life Really Simple? PAGE 8

QUESTION 3 Where Did the Instructions Come From? PAGE 13

QUESTION 4 Has All Life Descended From a Common Ancestor? PAGE 22

QUESTION 5 Is It Reasonable to Believe the Bible? PAGE 30

Bibliography PAGE 31

On the cover: A stylized depiction of a DNA molecule

Note: All three-dimensional models of molecules and of molecular

machines are simplified schematics and are not drawn to scale.

5 2010

WATCH TOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF PENNSYLVANIA

All Rights Reserved

Publishers

WATCHTOWER BIBLE AND TRACT SOCIETY OF NEW YORK, INC.

Brooklyn, New York, U.S.A.

2010 Printing

This publication is not for sale. It is provided as part of a worldwide

Bible educational work supported by voluntary donations.Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are from the modern-language

New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures—With References

Photo credits: Page 4: 5 Petit Format/Photo Researchers, Inc.; page 5: 5 SPL/Photo

Researchers, Inc.; page 22, tree of life: Image courtesy of Biodiversity Heritage Library;

page 27, skull: 5 Photolibrary/age fotostock; Ida: 5 Martin Shields/Alamy; page 28, skulls:

5 Medical-on-Line/Alamy; page 29, Java Man reconstruction: 5 The Print Collector/Alamy

The Origin of Life—Five Questions Worth Asking

English (lf -E)

Made in the United States of America

Each school year, scenarios like the

above play out in thousands of class-rooms around the globe. What shouldPeter and students like him do? Would

you not agree that they really need tomake up their own minds on this matter?They need to examine the evidence forevolution and for creation and then de-cide for themselves which they will be-lieve.

In fact, the Bible warns against blind-ly believing what others teach. “Anyoneinexperienced puts faith in every word,”states one Bible writer, “but the shrewdone considers his steps.” (Proverbs 14:

15) The Bible encourages Christians touse their “power of reason” and to proveto themselves the things they are taught.

—Romans 12:1, 2.

This brochure is not designed to sup-

port the efforts of religious groups wh

want to have creation taught in schoolThe purpose of this brochure is to examine claims made by those who teach thlife appeared spontaneously and assethat the Bible’s account of creation ismyth.

We will focus on the cell because this the most basic unit of life. You will bable to review some amazing facts abohow cells arebuilt. You willalso be askto analyze the assumptions that underpthe theory of evolution.

Sooner or later, all of us need to cofront the question, Was life created, o

did it evolve? You likely have already gen this topic serious thought. This brchure will present just some of the evdence that has led many to believe thlife was created.

A STUDENT’S DILEMMA

Peter shifts uneasily in his chair, a knot forming in his stomach. His tea cher,

a woman he respects, has just finished describing how Charles Darwin and his

theory of evolution advanced scientific understanding and liberated mankind

from superstitious beliefs. Now she has invited her students to express their

opinions on this topic.

Peter f aces a dilemma. His parents have taught him that God created the earth

and all life on it. They say that the Bible’s account of creation is trustworthy and

that evolution is simply a theory—one not supported by the evidence. Peter’s

teacher and his parents all mean well. But whom should Peter believe?

A STUDENT’S DILEMMA


3/16

What do many scientists claim? Many who believe in evolution would tell youthat billions of years ago, life beganon the edge of an ancient tidal pool ordeep in the ocean. They feel that in somesuch location, chemicals spontaneous-ly assembled into bubblelike structures,formed complex molecules, and beganreplicating. They believe that all life onearth originated by accident from one ormore of these “simple” original cells.

Other equally respected scientists whoalso support evolution disagree. They speculate that the first cells or at leasttheir major components arrived on earthfrom outer space. Why? Because, despitetheir best efforts, scientists have been un-

able to prove that life can spring fromnonliving molecules. In 2008, Professorof Biology Alexandre Meinesz highlight-ed the dilemma. He stated that over thelast 50 years, “no empirical evidence sup-

1HOW DID LIFE BEGIN?When you were a child, did you ever startle your parents by asking, “Where do

babies come from?” If so, how did they respond? Depending on your age and

their personality, your parents might have ignored the question or given you ahurried, embarrassed answer. Or perhaps they told you some fanciful tales that

you later found to be false. Of course, if a child is to be properly prepared for

adulthood and marriage, he or she eventually needs to learn about the wonders

of sexual reproduction.

Just as many parents feel awkward about discussing where babies come from,

some scientists seem reluctant to discuss an even more fundamental question

—Where did life come from? Receiving a credible answer to that question can

have a profound effect on a person’s outlook on life. So how did life begin?

A fertilized human egg cell, shown about800 times its actual size

4 THE ORIGIN OF LIFE

ports the hypotheses of the spontaneousappearance of life on Earth from nothingbut a molecular soup, and no significantadvance in scientific knowledge leads inthis direction.”1

What does the evidence reveal? Theanswer to the question, Where do babiescome from? is well-documented and un-controversial. Life always comes frompreexisting life. However, if we go back farenoughin time,is itreally possiblethat

this fundamental law was broken? Couldlife really spontaneously spring from non-living chemicals? What are the chancesthat such an event could happen?

Researchers have learned that for acell to survive, at least three differenttypes of complex molecules must work together—DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid),RNA (ribonucleic acid), and proteins.Today, few scientists would assert that acomplete living cell suddenly formed by chance from a mix of inanimate chemi-cals. What, though, is the probability thatRNAor proteins couldform by chance?1

Many scientists feel that life couldarise by chance because of an experimentfirst conducted in 1953. In that year,Stanley L. Miller was able to producesome amino acids, the chemical buildingblocks of proteins, by discharging elec-tricity into a mixture of gases that wasthought to represent the atmosphere of primitive earth. Since then, amino acidshave also been found in a meteorite. Dothese findings mean that all the basicbuilding blocks of life could easily be pro-duced by chance?

“Some writers,” says Robert Shapiro,professor emeritus of chemistry at New

York University, “have presumed that all life’s building blocks could be formed

1 The probability of DNA forming by chance willbe discussed in section 3, “Where Did the Instruc-tions Come From?”

with ease in Miller-type experiments anwere present in meteorites. This is notthcase.”21

Consider the RNA molecule. It is costructed of smaller molecules called ncleotides. A nucleotide is a different moecule from an amino acid and is onslightly more complex. Shapiro says th“no nucleotides of any kind have been rported as products of spark-discharge e

periments or in studies of meteorites.He further states that the probability a self-replicating RNA molecule randomly assembling from a pool of chemicbuilding blocks “is so vanishingly smathat its happening even once anywhein the visible universe would count aspiece of exceptional good luck.”4

What about protein molecules? Thcan be made from as few as 50 or amany as several thousand amino acidbound together in a highly specific ordeThe average functional protein in a “simple” cell contains 200 amino acids. Eve

1 Professor Shapiro does not believe that life wcreated. He believes that life arose by chance in som

fashion not yet fully understood. In 2009, scientiststhe University of Manchester, England, reported ming some nucleotides in their lab. However, Shapstates that their recipe “definitely does not meet mcriteria for a plausible pathway to the RNA world.”

STANLEY MILLER, 1953

1 HOW DID LIFE BEGIN?


4/16

in those cells, there are thousands of dif-ferent types of proteins. The probability

that just one protein containing only 100

amino acids could ever randomly form

on earth has been calculated to be aboutone chance in a million billion.

Researcher Hubert P. Yockey, whosupports the teaching of evolution, goes

further. He says: “It is impossible that the

origin of life was ‘proteins first.’”5 RNA is required to make proteins, yet proteins

are involved in the production of RNA.

What if, despite the extremely smallodds, both proteins and RNA molecules

did appear by chance in the same place

at the same time? How likely would it

be for them to cooperate to form a self-replicating, self-sustaining type of life?

“The probability of this happening by chance (given a random mixture of pro-teins and RNA) seems astronomically

low,” says Dr. Carol Cleland1

, a memberof the National Aeronautics and Space

1 Dr. Cleland is not a creationist. She believes thatlife arose by chance in some fashion not yet fully un-derstood.

Administration’s Astrobiology Institute.“Yet,” she continues, “most researchersseem to assume that if they can makesense of the independent production of proteins and RNA under natural primor-dial conditions, the coordination willsomehow take care of itself.” Regardingthe current theories of how these build-ing blocks of life could have arisen by chance, she says: “None of them haveprovided us with a very satisfying story about how this happened.”6

Why do these facts matter? Think of the challenge facing researchers whofeel that life arose by chance. They havefound some amino acids that also appearin living cells. In their laboratories, they have, by means of carefully designed anddirected experiments, manufactured oth-er more complex molecules. Ultimately,they hope to build all the parts neededto construct a “simple” cell. Their situa-tion could be likened to that of a scientistwho takes naturally occurring elements;transforms them into steel, plastic, sili-cone, and wire; and constructs a robot.He then programs the robot to be able to

build copies of itself. By doing so, whatwill he prove? At best, that an intelligententity can create an impressive machine.

Similarly, if scientists ever did con-struct a cell, they would accomplish

If the creation of complex molecules in thelaboratory requires the skill of a scientist,could the far more complex molecules ina cell really arise by chance?

1

23

RNA– is required to make proteins—, yetproteins are involved in the production of RNA.How could either one arise by chance, let aloneboth? Ribosomes˜ will be discussed insection 2.

6 THE ORIGIN OF LIFE 1 HOW DID LIFE BEGIN?

˛ Fact: All scientific research indicates that life

cannot spring from nonliving matter.

Question: What is the scientific basis for saying

that the first cell sprang from nonliving chemi-

cals?

˛ Fact: Researchers have recreated in the lab-

oratory the environmental conditions that they

believe existed early in the earth’s history. In

these experiments, a few scientists have manu-

factured some of the molecules found in living

things.Question: If the chemicals in the experiment

represent the earth’s early environment and the

molecules produced represent the building

blocks of life, whom or what does the scientist

who performed the experiment repres

he or she represent blind chance or

gent entity?

˛ Fact: Protein and RNA molecules m

together for a cell to survive. Scientis

that it is highly unlikely that RNA form

chance. The odds against even one pr

ing by chance are astronomical. It is

ly improbable that RNA and proteins s

by chance in the same place at the s

and be able to work together.Question: What takes greater faith—t

that the millions of intricately coordin

of a cell arose by chance or to believe

cell is the product of an intelligent min

FACTS AND QUESTIONS

something truly amazing—but would they prove that the cell could be made by acci-dent? If anything, they would prove the

very opposite, would they not?

What do you think? All scientific evi-dence to date indicates that life can comeonly from previously existing life. To be-lieve that even a “simple” living cell aroseby chance from nonliving chemicals re-quires a huge leap of faith.

Given the facts, are you willing tomake such a leap? Before answering thatquestion, take a closer look at the way acell is made. Doing so will help you dis-cern whether the theories some scientistspropound about where life came from aresound or are as fanciful as the tales someparents tell about where babies comefrom.

If it takes an intelligent entity to create andprogram a lifeless robot, what would it taketo create a living cell, let alone a human?


5/16


6/16


Some of these proteins (1) have a holethrough the middle of them that allowsonly specific types of molecules in andout of the cell. Other proteins are openon one side of the cell membrane (2) andclosed on the other. They have a dock-ing site (3) shaped to fit a specific sub-stance. When that substance docks, the

otherend of the protein opens and releas-es the cargo through the membrane (4). All this activity is happening on the sur-face of even the simplest of cells.

INSIDE THE FACTORY

Imagine that you have been allowedpast the “security guard” and are now in-side the cell. The interior of a prokaryoticcell is filled with a watery fluid that is richin nutrients, salts, and other substanc-es. The cell uses these raw ingredients tomanufacture the products it needs. Butthe process is not haphazard. Like an ef-ficiently run factory, the cell organizes

thousands of chemical reactions so thatthey take place in a specific order and ac-cording to a set timetable.

A cell spends a lot of its time makingproteins. How does it do so? First, you

would see the cell make about 20 differ-

ent basic building blocks called amino

acids. These building blocks are deliv-

ered to the ribosomes (5), which may be

likened to automated machines that link

the amino acids in a precise order to

form a specific protein. Just as the op-

erations of a factory might be governed

by a central computer program, many of

the functions of a cell are governed by a

“computer program,” or code, known as

DNA (6). From the DNA, the ribosomereceives a copy of detailed instructions

thattell it which protein to build and how

to build it (7).

What happens as the protein is made

is nothing short of amazing! Each one

folds into a unique three-dimensional

shape (8). It is this shape that determines

the specialized job that the protein will

do.1 Picture a production line where en-

gine parts are being assembled. Each part

needs to be precisely constructed if the

1 Enzymes are one example of proteins made by cells. Each enzyme is folded in a special way to accel-

erate a particular chemical reaction. Hundreds of en-zymes cooperate to regulate the cell’s activities.

The cell membrane has“security guards” that allowonly specific substances topass in or out

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

engine is to work. Similarly, if a protein isnot precisely constructed and folded toexactly the right shape, it will not be ableto do its work properly and may evendamage the cell.

How does the protein find its way fromwhere it was made to where it is needed?Each protein the cell makes has a built-in“address tag” that ensures that the pro-tein will be delivered to where it is need-ed. Although thousands of proteins are

built and delivered each minute, each onearrives at the correct destination.

Why do these facts matter? The com-plex molecules in the simplest livingthing cannot reproduce alone. Outsidethe cell, they break down. Inside thecell, they cannot reproduce without thehelp of other complex molecules. For ex-ample, enzymes are needed to producea special energy molecule called adeno-sine triphosphate (ATP), but energy from ATP is needed to produce enzymes.Similarly, DNA (section 3 discusses thismolecule) is required to make enzymes,but enzymes are required to make DNA.

Also, other proteins can be made only by

the cell “factory”How Proteins Are Made

Like an automated factory, the cellis full of machines that assembleand deliver complex products

Some bacteria can make replicas of th

selves within 20 minutes. Each cell cop

the controlling “computer programs.” T

divides. If it had unlimited access to fu

one cell could increase in number expo

ly. At that rate, it would take only two d

produce a clump of cells with a weight

than 2,500 times greater than that of

earth.15 Cells that are more complex ca

replicate quickly. For example, when yo

developing in your mother’s womb, ne

cells formed at the astounding rate of 2

per minute!16

Human manufacturers often have to sa

quality to produce an item at a fast pac

is it possible, then, that cells can repro

so fast and so accurately if they are the

of undirected accidents?

HOW FAST CAN A CELL REPRODUC


7/16


a cell, but a cell can be made only withproteins.1

Microbiologist Radu Popa does notagree with the Bible’s account of cre-

1 Some of the cells in the human body are made upof about 10,000,000,000 protein molecules11 of sever-al hundred thousand different kinds. 12

ation. Yet, in 2004 he asked: “How can

nature make life if we failed with all theexperimental conditions controlled?”13

He also stated: “The complexity of the

mechanisms required for the functioningof a living cell is so large that a simul-

taneous emergence by chance seems im-possible.”14

What do you think? The theory of evolu-

tion tries to account for the origin of lifeon earth without the necessity of divineintervention. However, the more that

scientists discover about life, the less like-ly it appears that it could arise by chance.

To sidestep this dilemma, some evolu-tionary scientists would like to make a

distinction between the theory of evolu-tion and the question of the origin of life.But does that sound reasonable to you?

The theory of evolution rests on the

notion that a long series of fortunate acci-dents produced life to start with. It thenproposes that another series of undirect-

ed accidents produced the astonishing di-

versity and complexity of all living things.However, if the foundation of the theory is missing, what happens to the other the-

ories that are built on this assumption?Just as a skyscraper built without a foun-

dation would collapse, a theory of evolu-tion that cannot explain the origin of lifewill crumble.

After briefly considering the structure

and function of a “simple” cell, what do

you see—evidence of many accidents orproof of brilliant design? If you are still

unsure, take a closer look at the “masterprogram” that controls the functions of

all cells.

If this skyscraper must collapse because it has a flimsyfoundation, must not the theory of evolution collapsebecause it has no explanation for the origin of life?

˛ Fact: The extraordinarily complex molecules

that make up a cell—DNA, RNA, proteins—seem

designed to work together.

Question: What seems more likely to you? Did

unintelligent evolution construct the intricate

machines depicted on page 10, or were those

machines the product of an intelligent mind?

˛ Fact: Some respected scientists say that even

a “simple” cell is far too complex to have arisen

by chance on earth.

Question: If some scientists are willing to specu-

late that life came from an extraterrestrial source,what is the basis for ruling out God as that

Source?

FACTS AND QUESTIONS

What do many scientists claim? Many

biologists and other scientists feel that

DNA and its coded instructions came

about through undirected chance events

that took place over the course of mil-

lions of years. They say that there is no

evidence of design in the structure of this

molecule nor in the information that it

carries and transmits nor in the way that

it functions.17

What doesthe Biblesay? The Bible sug-

gests that the formation of our differentbody parts—and even the timing of their

formation—involves a figurative book

that originates with God. Notice how

King David was inspired to describe mat-

ters, saying of God: “Your eyes saw evetheembryo of me,and in your book alli

parts were down in writing, as regards th

days when they were formed and thewas not yet one among them.”—Psal

139:16.

What does the evidence reveal? If ev

lution is true, then it should seem leastreasonably possible thatDNA cou

have come about by means of a series

chance events. If the Bible is true, theDNA should provide strong evidenc

that it is the product of an orderly, intelgent mind.

When considered in the simplest

terms, the subject of DNA is qui

3WHERE DID THE

INSTRUCTIONS COME FROM?

Why do you look the way you do? What determines the color of your eyes, your hair, your skin? What about your height, your

build, or your resemblance to one or both of your parents? What

tells the ends of your fingers to grow soft pads on one side and

hard, protective nails on the other?

In Charles Darwin’s day, the answers to such questions were

shrouded in mystery. Darwin himself was fascinated by the way

traits are passed along from one generation to the next, but he

knew little about the laws of genetics and even less about the

mechanisms within the cell that govern heredity. Now, however,

biologists have spent decades studying human genetics and

the detailed instructions that are embedded in the amazing mole

cule called DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). Of course, the big ques-

tion is, Where did these instructions come from?

3 WHERE DID THE INSTRUCTIONS COME FROM?


8/16


understandable—and fascinating. So letus take another trip to the inside of acell. This time, though, we will visit a human cell. Imagine that you are going toa museum designed to teach you abouthow such a cell works. The whole mu-seum is a model of a typical human cell

—but magnified some 13,000,000 times.It is the size of a giant sports arena, thekind that can seat an audience of about70,000 people.

You enter the museum and stare awe-struck at this wondrous place full of strange forms and structures. Near thecenter of the cell stands the nucleus, asphere about 20 stories tall. You make

your way there.

You go through a door in the nucleus’outer skin, or membrane, and look around you. Dominating this chamberare 46 chromosomes. Arranged in identi-cal pairs, they vary in height, but the pairnearest you is about 12 stories tall (1).Each chromosome has a pinched placenear the middle, so it looks a bit like alink sausage but is as thick as a massivetree trunk. You see a variety of bandsrunning across the model chromosomes.

As you draw closer, you see that eachhorizontal band is divided by verticallines. Between those are shorter horizon-tal lines (2). Are they stacks of books?

No; they are the outer edges of loops,packed tightly in columns. You pull atone of them, and it comes free. You areamazed to see that the loop is composed

of smaller coils (3), also neatly arranged.Within those coils is the main feature of all of this—something resembling a long,long rope. What is it?

THE STRUCTURE OF

AN AMAZING MOLECULE

Let us simply call this part of the mod-

el chromosome a rope. It is about an

inch thick. It is looped tightly aroundspools (4) , which help to form the coilswithin coils. These coils are attachedto a kind of scaffold that holds them inplace. A sign on the display explains thatthe rope is packed very efficiently. If you

were to pull the rope from each of thesemodel chromosomes and lay it all out,from end to end it would stretch abouthalfway around the earth!1

One science book calls this efficient

packaging system “an extraordinary featof engineering.”18 Does the suggestionthat there was no engineer behind thisfeat sound credible to you? If this mu-seum had a huge store with millions of

items for sale and they were all so ti-

1 The textbook Molecular Biology of the Cell uses adifferent scale. It says that trying to pack these longstrands into a cell nucleus would be like trying to pack 24 miles of very fine thread into a tennis ball—butin such a neat, organized way that each part of thethread remains easily accessible.

1

1

dily arranged that you could easily findany item you needed, would you assumethat no one had organized the place? Of course not! But such order would be asimple feat by comparison.

In the museum display, a sign invites you to take a length of this rope in yourhands for a closer look (5). As you run itbetween your fingers, you see that this isno ordinary rope. It is composed of twostrands twisted around each other. The

strands are connected by tiny bars, even-ly spaced. The rope looks like a ladderthat has been twisted until it resembles aspiral staircase (6). Then it hits you: Youare holding a model of the DNA mole-cule—one of the great mysteries of life!

A single DNA molecule, tidily pacaged with its spools and scaffold, makup a chromosome. The rungs of the la

der are known as base pairs (7). What dthey do? What is all of this for? A displa

sign offers a simplified explanation.

THE ULTIMATE INFORMATIONSTORAGE SYSTEM

The key to the DNA, the sign say

lies in those rungs, the bars connec

ing the two sides of the ladder. Imaine the ladder split apart. Each side hpartial rungs sticking out. They come only four types. Scientists dub them A

T, G, and C. Scientists were amazed

2

3

4

5

6

7

a “feat of engineering”How DNA Is Packed

Packing the DNA into the nucleus is

an amazing feat of engineering—likepacking 24 miles of very fine threadinto a tennis ball


9/16


discover that the order of those lettersconveys information in a sort of code.

You may know that Morse code wasinvented in the 19th century so that peo-

ple could communicate by telegraph.That code had only two “letters”—a dot

and a dash. Yet, it could be used to spellout countless words or sentences. Well,DNA has a four-letter code. The order inwhich those letters—A, T, G, and C—ap-pear forms “words” called codons. Co-

dons are arranged in “stories” calledgenes. Each gene contains, on average,27,000 letters. These genes and the longstretches between them are compiled

into chapters of a sort—the individu-al chromosomes. It takes 23 chromo-

somes to form the complete “book”—thegenome, or total of genetic informationabout an organism.1

The genome would be a huge book.How much information would it hold?

All told, the human genome is made upof about threebillion basepairs, or rungs,

on the DNA ladder.19 Imagine a set of

encyclopedias in which each volume isover a thousand pages long. The genomewould fill 428 of such volumes. Adding

the second copy that is found in eachcell would make that 856 volumes. If youwere to type out the genome by yourself,

it would be a full-time job—with no vaca-tions—lasting some 80 years!

Of course, what you would end upwith after all that typing would be use-

less to your body.How would you fit hun-dreds of bulky volumes into each of your100 trillion microscopic cells? To com-

press so much information so greatly isfar beyond us.

A professor of molecular biology andcomputer science noted: “One gram of

1 Each cell contains two complete copies of the ge-nome, 46 chromosomes in all.

DNA, which when dry would occupy a volume of approximately one cubic cen-timeter, can store as much informationas approximately one trillion CDs [com-pact discs].”20 What does that mean? Re-member, the DNA contains the genes,the instructions for building a unique hu-man body. Each cell has a complete setof instructions. DNA is so dense with in-formation that a single teaspoonful of itcould carry the instructions for building

about 350 times the number of humansalive today! The DNA required for theseven billion people living on earth now would barely make a film on the surfaceof that teaspoon.21

A BOOK WITH NO AUTHOR?

Despite advances in miniaturization,no man-made information storage devicecan approach such a capacity. Yet, thecompact disc offers an apt comparison.Consider this: A compact disc may im-press us with its symmetrical shape, itsgleaming surface, its efficient design. We

replicationHow DNA Is Copied

– This part of the enzyme machine splitsthe DNA into two separate strands

— This part of the machine takes in asingle strand of DNA and uses it as atemplate to create a double strand

˜ Ring-shaped sliding clamp that guidesand stabilizes the enzyme machine

™ Two complete DNA strands are formed

see clear evidence that intelligent peoplemade it. But what if it is embedded withinformation—not random gibberish, butcoherent, detailed instructions for build-ing, maintaining, and repairing complex machinery? That information does notperceptibly change the weight or the sizeof the disc. Yet, it is the most importantfeature of that disc. Would not those writ-ten instructions convince you that theremust be some intelligent mind at work

here? Does not writing require a writer?It is not far-fetched to compare DNA

to a compact disc or to a book. In fact,one book about the genome notes: “Theidea of the genome as a book is not, strict-ly speaking, even a metaphor. It is literal-ly true. A book is a piece of digital infor-mation . . . So is a genome.” The authoradds: “The genome is a very clever book,because in the right conditions it canboth photocopy itself and read itself.”22

That brings up another important aspectof DNA.

MACHINES IN MOTION

As you stand there in the quiet, yofind yourself wondering if the nucleuof a cell is really as still as a museumThen you notice another display. Abova glass case containing a length of modDNA is a sign that reads: “Push Buttofor Demonstration.” You push the buton, and a narrator explains: “DNA hat least two very important jobs. The firis called replication. DNA has to be co

ied so that every new cell will have a complete copy of the same genetic informtion. Please watch this simulation.”

Through a door at one end of the dplay comes a complex-looking machinIt is actually a cluster of robots closly linked together. The machine goes the DNA, attaches itself, and begins move along the DNA as a train might folow a track. It moves a little too fast fo

you to see exactly what it is doing, b

1

2

2

3

3

3

If DNA were the size of atrack, the enzyme machbe moving at the rate of50 miles per hour


10/16

you can easily see that behind it, there arenow two complete DNA ropes instead of one.

The narrator explains: “This is a great-ly simplified version of what goes onwhen DNA is replicated. A group of mo-lecular machines called enzymes travelalong the DNA, first splitting it in two,then using each strand as a template tomake a new, complementary strand. Wecannot show you all the parts involved

—such as the tiny device that runs aheadof the replication machine and snipsone side of the DNA so that it can twirlaround freely instead of getting woundup too tight. Nor can we show you how the DNA is ‘proofread’ several times.Errors are detected and corrected to an

amazing degree of accuracy.”—See thediagram on pages 16 and 17.

The narrator continues: “What we canshow you clearly is the speed. You no-ticed this robot moving at a pretty goodclip, didn’t you? Well, the actual enzymemachinery moves along the DNA ‘track’at a rate of about 100 rungs, or basepairs, every second.23 If the ‘track’ werethe size of a railroad track, this ‘engine’would be barreling along at the rate of over 50 miles per hour. In bacteria, these

little replication machines can move tentimes faster than that! In the human cell,armies of hundreds of these replicationmachines go to work at different spotsalong the DNA ‘track.’ They copy the en-tire genome in just eight hours.”24 (Seethe box “A Molecule That Can Be Readand Copied,” on page 20.)

“READING” DNA

The DNA-replicating robots trundleoff the scene. Another machine appears.It too moves along a stretch of DNA,but more slowly. You see the DNA ropeentering one end of this machine andemerging from the other—unchanged.But a single strand, a new one, is comingout of a separate opening in the machine,like a growing tail. What is going on?

Again the narrator p rovides an expla-nation: “DNA’s second job is called tran-scription. The DNA never leaves thesafe shelter of the nucleus. So how canits genes—the recipes for all the proteins

your body is made of—ever be read andused? Well, this enzyme machine finds

a spot along the DNA where a gene hasbeen switched on by chemical signalscoming in from outside the cell nucleus.Thenthis machineuses a molecule calledRNA (ribonucleic acid) to make a copy of that gene. RNA looks a lot like a sin-gle strand of DNA, but it is different. Its

3

One gram of DNA carries as muchinformation as a trillion CDs could

18

job is to pick up the information codedin the genes. The RNA gets that informa-tion while in the enzyme machine, thenexits the nucleus and heads to one of theribosomes, where the information will beused to build a protein.”

As you watch the demonstration, youarefilled with wonder. You aredeeply im-

pressed by this museum and the ingenu-ity of those who designed and built itsmachines. But what if this entire place

with all its exhibits could be set in mo-tion, demonstrating all the thousands

upon thousands of tasks that go on in the

human cell at the same time? What aawe-inspiring spectacle that would be!

You rea liz e, tho ugh , tha t all theprocesses carried out by tiny, complmachines are actually going on right noin your own 100 trillion cells! Your DN

is being read, providing directions build the hundreds of thousands of d

ferent proteins that make up your bod —its enzymes, tissues, organs, and so oRight now your DNA is being copied an

proofread for errors so that a fresh set directions is there to be read in each ne

cell.

transcriptionHow DNA Is “Read”

– The DNA is unwound here. An exposed strandpasses information to the RNA

— The RNA “reads” the DNA, picking up the codewithin a gene. The DNA code tells the transcriptionmachine where to start and stop

˜ Loaded with information, the RNA exits the cellnucleus and goes to a ribosome, where it will impartthe instructions on how to build a complex protein

™ Transcription machine

1

2

4


11/16

How can DNA be read and copied so reliably? The four chemi-

cal bases used in the DNA ladder—A, T, G, and C—form the

ladder’s individual rungs by always pairing in the same way:

A with T, and G with C. If one side of a rung is A, the other side

is always T; G always meets C. Therefore, if you have one side

of the ladder, you know the other side of the ladder. Where one

side of the ladder reads GTCA, the other side must read CAGT.

The partial rungs differ in length, but when they pair up with

their complements, they make complete rungs of one uniform

length.

Discovering that fact led scientists to another breakthrough

about this remarkable molecule: DNA is perfectly suited for

being copied over and over. The enzyme machine that repli-

cates DNA takes in free-floating units of those four chemicals

from the environment in the nucleus. Then it uses them to

complete each rung on the split DNA strand.

So a DNA molecule really is like a book that is read and copied

over and over again. In the average life span of a human, DNA

is copied some 10,000,000,000,000,000 times, with amazing

fidelity.28

A MOLECULE THAT CAN BE READ AND COPIED

WHY DO THESE FACTS MATTER?

Again, let us ask ourselves, ‘Where did all these

instructions come from?’ The Bible suggests that

this “book” and its writing originate with a super-

human Author. Is that conclusion really out-of-

date or unscientific?

Consider this: Could humans even build the

museum just described? They would run into real

difficulty if they tried. Much about the human ge-

nome and how it functions is little understood as

yet. Scientists are still trying to figure out where

all the genes are and what they do. And the genes

comprise only a small part of the DNA strand.

What about all those long stretches that do not

contain genes? Scientists have called those parts

junk DNA, but more recently they have been

modifying that stance. Those parts may control

how and to what extent the genes are used. And

even if scientists could create a full model of the

G C

A T

C G

A T

G C

˛ Fact: DNA is packaged within the chr

in a manner so efficient that it has bee

“feat of engineering.”

Question: How could such order and or

arise by undirected chance events?

˛ Fact: DNA’s capacity to store informa

has no equal in today’s computer age.

Question: If human computer technicia

achieve such results, how could mindle

do so on its own?

˛ Fact: DNA contains all the instruction

to build a unique human body and ma

throughout life.

Question: How could such writing com

without a writer, such programming wi

programmer?

˛ Fact: For DNA to work, it has to be co

and proofread by a swarm of complex

machines called enzymes, which must

together with precision and split-second

Question: Do you believe that highly co

highly reliable machinery can come abchance? Without solid proof, would not

belief amount to blind faith?

FACTS AND QUESTIONS

DNA and the machines that copy andproofread it, could they make it actually function as the real one does?

Famous scientist Richard Feynmanleft this note on a blackboard shortly be-

fore his death: “What I cannot create, Ido not understand.”25 His candid humil-ity is refreshing, and his statement, ob-

vio usl y tru e in the cas e of DNA .Scientists cannot create DNA with all

its replication and transcription machin-

ery; nor can they fully understand it. Yet,some assert that they know that it allcame about by undirected chance and ac-cidents. Does the evidence that you have

considered really support such a conclu-sion?

Some learned men have decided thatthe evidence points the other way. For

example, Francis Crick, a scientist whohelped to discover DNA’s double-helix structure, decided that this molecule is

far too organized to have come aboutthrough undirected events. He proposedthat intelligent extraterrestrials may have

sent DNA to the earth to help get lifestarted here.26

More recently, noted philosopher An-tony Flew, who advocated atheism for 50

years, did an about-face of sorts. At 81 years of age, he began to express a belief that some intelligence must have been

at work in the creation of life. Why thechange? A study of DNA. When asked if his new line of thought might prove un-

popular among scientists, Flew reported-ly answered: “That’s too bad. My wholelife has been guided by the principle

. . . [to] follow the evidence, wherever it

leads.”27

What do you think? Where does the ev-

idence lead? Imagine that you found acomputer room in the heart of a facto-

ry. The computer is running a complex

master program that directs all the worings of that factory. What is more, thprogram is constantly sending out istructions on how to build and maitain everymachinethere, andit is makincopies of itself and proofreading themWhat would that evidence lead you tconclude? That the computer and its prgram must have made themselves or ththey were produced by orderly, intelgent minds? Really, the evidence spea

for itself.


12/16

What do many scientists claim? Many

give the impression that the fossil record

supports the theory of a common origin

for life. They also claim that because all

living things use similar “computer lan-

guage,” or DNA, that all life must have

evolved from a common ancestor.

What does the Bible say? The Genesis

account states that plants, sea creatures,

land animals, and birds were created “ac-

cording to their kinds.” (Genesis 1:12,

20-25) This description allows for varia-

tion within a “kind,” but it implies that

there are fixed barriers separating the dif-

ferent kinds. The Bible account of cre-

ation also leads us to expect that new

types of creatures would appear in the

fossil record suddenly and fully formed.

What does the evidence reveal? Doesthe evidence support the Bible’s descrip-

tion of events, or was Darwin correct?

What have discoveries over the past 150 years revealed?

DARWIN’S TREE CHOPPED DOWN

In recent years, scientists have been

able to compare the genetic codes of doz-ens of different single-celled organisms aswell as those of plants and animals. They assumed that such comparisons wouldconfirm the branching “tree of life” pro-posed by Darwin. However, this has notbeen the case.

What has the research uncovered?In 1999 biologist Malcolm S. Gordonwrote: “Life appears to have had many origins. The base of the universal treeof life appears not to have been a singleroot.” Is there evidence that all the majorbranches of life are connected to a single

trunk, as Darwin believed? Gordon con-tinues: “Thetraditional version of the the-ory of common descent apparently does

4HAS ALL LIFE DESCENDED FROM

A COMMON ANCESTOR?

Darwin thought that all life might be traced to a common

ancestor. He imagined that the history of life on earth resem-

bled a grand tree. Later, others believed that this “tree of

life” started as a single trunk with the first simple cells. New

species branched from the trunk and continued to divide into

limbs, or families of plants and animals, and then into twigs,

all the species within the families of plants and animals alive

today. Is that really what happened?

BEGINNING OF THE EARTH’S HISTORY TIME

122

not apply to kingdoms as presently rec-ognized. It probably does not apply tomany, if not all, phyla, and possibly alsonot to many classes within the phyla.” 291

Recent research continues to contra-dict Darwin’s theory ofcommon descent.For example, in 2009 an article in NewScientist magazine quoted evolutionary scientist Eric Bapteste as saying: “Wehave no evidence at all that the tree of life is a reality.”30 The same article quotes

evolutionary biologist Michael Rose assaying: “The tree of life is being polite-ly buried, we all know that. What’s lessaccepted is that our whole fundamental

view of biology needs to change.”312

WHAT ABOUT THE FOSSIL RECORD?

Many scientists point to the fossilrecord as support for the idea that lifeemerged from a common origin. They ar-gue, for example, that the fossil recorddocuments the notion that fish becameamphibians and reptiles became mam-mals. What, though, does the fossil evi-dence really show?

“Instead of finding the gradual unfold-ing of life,” says evolutionary paleontolo-gist David M. Raup, “what geologists of Darwin’s time, and geologists of the pres-

1 The biological term phyla (singular, phylum) re-fers to a large group of animals that have the same dis-tinctive body plan. One way that scientists classify allliving things is by a seven-step system in which eachstep is more specific than the one before it. Step oneis kingdom, the broadest category. Then come the cat-egories phylum, class, order, family, genus, and spe-cies. For example, the horse is categorized in the fol-lowing way: kingdom, Animalia; phylum, Chordata;class, Mammalia; order, Perissodactyla; family, Equi-dae; genus, Equus; species, Caballus.

2 It should be noted that neither the New Scientist article nor Bapteste nor Rose mean to suggest thatthe theory of evolution is wrong. Their point, rather,

is that Darwin’s proposed tree of life, a mainstay of his theory, is not supported by the evidence. Suchscientists still seek other explanations involving evolu-tion.

ent day actually find is a highly uneveor jerky record; that is, species appein the sequence very suddenly, show ltle or no change during their existence the record, then abruptly go out of threcord.”32

In reality, the vast majority of fossishow stability among types of creaturover extensive amounts of time. The evdence does not show them evolving froone type into another. Unique body pla

appear suddenly. New features appesuddenly. For example, bats with sonand echolocation systems appear with nobvious link to a more primitive ancetor.

In fact, more than half of all the m jor divisions of animal life seem to haappeared in a relatively short period time. Because many new and distinct liforms appear so suddenly in the fosrecord, paleontologists refer to this peod as “the Cambrian explosion.” Whewas the Cambrian period?

Let us assume that the estimates of rsearchers are accurate. In that case, th

history of the earth could be represened by a time line that stretches the lengof a soccer field (1). At that scale, yowould have to walk about seven eighthof the way down the field before yowould come to what paleontologists cathe Cambrian period (2). During a smasegment of that period, the major divsions of animal life show up in the fosil record. How suddenly do they appea

As you walk down the soccer field, athose different creatures pop up in thspace of less than one step!

The relatively sudden appearance

these diverse life forms is causing somevolutionary researchers to question thtraditional version of Darwin’s theor

“ CA MB RI AN E XP LO SI ON ” T OD AY

2


13/16


14/16


had been trying to interpret fossil evi-dence in terms of accepted evolutionary ideas.”37

What about evolutionists today?Could it be that they continue to placefossils in a certain order, not becausesuch a sequence is well-supported by the majority of fossil and genetic evi-dence, but because doing so is in harmo-ny with currently accepted evolutionary

ideas?1

1 See, for example, the box “What About HumanEvolution?”

What do you think? Which conclusionfits the evidence best? Consider the factswe have discussed so far.

˛ The first life on earth was not “simple.”

˛ The odds against even the componentsof a cell arising by chance are astronomi-cal.

˛ DNA, the “computer program,” orcode,that runs the cell,is incredibly com-plex and gives evidence of a genius thatfar surpasses any program or informationstorage system produced by humans.

˛ Genetic research shows that life didnot originate from a single commonancestor. In addition, major groups of animals appear suddenly in the fossilrecord.

In light of these facts, do you think it isreasonable to conclude that the evidenceis in harmony with the Bible’s explana-tion of the origin of life? Many people,however, assert that science contradictsmuch of what the Bible says about cre-ation. Is that true? What does the Biblereally say?

If “95 frames” of the fossil record show thatanimals do not evolve from one type intoanother, why do paleontologists arrange theremaining “5 frames” to imply that they do?

˛ Fact: Two of evolution’s fundamental ideas

—that life has a common origin and that major

new body types appear as a result of the slow

accumulation of small changes—are being

challenged by researchers who do not support

the Bible account of creation.

Question: Given the controversy over these

pillars of Darwin’s theory, can his version of

evolution honestly be referred to as scientific

fact?

˛ Fact: All living organisms share similarly

designed DNA, the “computer language,” or

code, that governs much of the shape and

function of their cell or cells.

Question: Could this similarity exist, not because

they had the same ancestor, but because they

had the same Designer?

FACTS AND QUESTIONS

Look up the topic of human evolution in many

textbooks and encyclopedias and you will see a

series of pictures—on one side a stooped, ape-

like creature followed by creatures that have pro-

gressively more upright posture and larger

heads. At the end stands modern man. Such

renderings along with sensational media reports

of the discovery of so-called missing links give

the impression that there is ample evidence that

man evolved from apelike creatures. Are such

assertions based on solid evidence? Consider

what evolutionary researchers say about the fol-

lowing topics.1

WHAT THE FOSSIL EVIDENCE

ACTUALLY SHOWS

˛ Fact: At the beginning of the 20th century, all

the fossils that were used to support the theory

that humans and apes evolved from a common

ancestor could fit on a billiard table. Since then,

the number of fossils used to support that theory

has increased. Now it is claimed that they wouldfill a railroad boxcar.38 However, the vast majority

of those fossils consist only of single bones and

isolated teeth. Complete skulls—let alone com-

plete skeletons—are rare.39

Question: Has the increased number of fossils

attributed to the human “family tree” settled the

question among evolutionary experts as to when

and how humans evolved from apelike crea-

tures?

Answer: No. In fact, the opposite is true.

When it comes to how these fossils should be

classified, Robin Derricourt of the University of

New South Wales, Australia, wrote in 2009:

“Perhaps the only consensus now is that there isno consensus.”40 In 2007 the science journal

1 Note: None of the researchers quoted in this boxbelieve in the Bible’s teaching of creation. All accept the

teaching of evolution.

Nature published an ar-

ticle by the discoverers

of another claimed link in

the evolutionary tree, say-

ing that nothing is known

about when or how the hu-

man line actually emerged from that

Gyula Gyenis, a researcher at the De

of Biological Anthropology, E ¨ otv

¨ os Lor

sity, Hungary, wrote in 2002: “The cla

and the evolutionary place of hominid

been under constant debate.”1 This a

states that the fossil evidence gathe

brings us no closer to knowing exact

where, or how humans evolved from

creatures.42

ANNOUNCEMENTS

OF “MISSING LINKS”

˛ Fact: The media often widely broad

the announcement that a new “missi

been discovered. For example, in 200dubbed Ida was unveiled with what o

called “rock-star hype.”43 Publicity inc

headline in The Guardian newspaper

ed Kingdom (UK): “Fossil Ida: Extraord

Is ‘Missing Link’ in Human Evolution.

ever, just days later, the UK science jo

Scientist said: “Ida is not a ‘missing l

man evolution.”45

Question: Why is each unveiling of a n

ing link” given wide media attention,

the removal of that fossil from the “fa

is hardly mentioned?

1 The term “hominid” is used to describe lutionary researchers feel make up the huma

prehistoric humanlike species.

What about

human evolution?


15/16


16/16


In the course of reading this brochure,

were you surprised to learn that whatthe Bible says is scientifically accurate?

Many people are. They are equally sur-prised to learn that the Bible does not say some of the things that many religions

claim that it says. Some say, for exam-ple, that the Bible teaches that God made

the universe and all life in it within six 24-hour days. In fact, there is nothing inthe Bible that contradicts scientists’ vari-

ous estimates on the age of the universeor the earth.1

Furthermore, the Bible’s brief out-line of how God brought life into be-

ing on this planet leaves ample roomfor scientific inquiry and theory. The Bi-

ble does state that God created all lifeand that living things are made “accord-

ing to their kinds.” (Genesis 1:11, 21, 24)These statements may be at odds with

1 For more information, see the brochure Was LifeCreated? published by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

certain scientific theories, but not with

established scientific fact. The history of science shows that theories come and go;

the facts remain.

There are many people, though, whohesitate to investigate the Bible because

they are disillusioned with religion. They

look at organized religion and see hypoc-risy, corruption, warmongering. But is itfair to judge the Bible by the behavior of

some who claim to represent it? Many humane and sincere scientists have beenhorrified by the way that some violent

bigots have used the evolution theory tosupport their racist aims. Would it be fairto judge the theory of evolution on that

basis? Surely it is better to investigate the

theory’s claims and compare them withthe available evidence.

We urge you to do the same with the

Bible. You may be pleasantly surprised tolearn how profoundly its teachings differ

from those of most organized religions.

5IS ITREASONABLETO

BELIEVE THE BIBLE?

Have you ever been misled about a person? Maybe you heard others talk about

him or quote him. You expected to dislike him—only to find, on getting to know him,

that he had been misrepresented. Many have had such an experience regarding

the Bible.

More than a few educated people take a dim view of the Bible. Can you under-

stand why? That book is often represented or quoted in such a way that it sounds

unreasonable, unscientific, or just plain wrong. Is it possible that the Bible has

been misrepresented?

Far from promoting wars and ethnic vilence, the Bible teaches that God’s se

vants must repudiate war and even thhatred thatleads to suchviolence.(Isaia2:2-4; Matthew 5:43, 44; 26:52) Far froadvocating fanaticism and belief withoevidence, the Bible teaches that evidenis essential to genuine faith and that thpower of reason is an indispensable ato serving God. (Romans 12:1; Hebrew11:1) Far from squelching curiosity, thBible encourages us to probe some of th

most fascinating and challenging quetions that humans have ever faced.

For example, have you ever wondere‘If there is a God, why does he allowickedness?’ The Bible addresses thquestion, as well as many others, in a saisfying way.1 We urge you to pursue youquestfor truth. You can find answers thare fascinating, thrilling, reasonable—anbased on convincing evidence. And this no accident.

1 See chapter 11 of the book What Does the Bib Really Teach? published by Jehovah’s Witnesses.

1. How Did Life Begin?

1. How Life Began—Evolution’s ThreeGeneses, by Alexandre Meinesz, translat-ed by Daniel Simberloff, 2008, pp. 30-33, 45.

a. Life Itself—Its Origin and Nature, by Francis Crick, 1981, pp. 15-16, 141-153.

2. Scientific American, “A Simpler Originfor Life,” by Robert Shapiro, June 2007,p. 48.

a. The New York Times, “A Leading Mys-tery of Life’s Origins Is Seemingly

Solved,” by Nicholas Wade, May 14,2009, p. A23.

3. Scientific American, June 2007, p. 48.

4. Scientific American, June 2007, pp. 47,49-50.

5. Information Theory, Evolution, and theOrigin of Life, by Hubert P. Yockey,

2005, p. 182.

6. NASA’s Astrobiology Magazine,

“Life’s Working Definition—Does

It Work?” (http://www.nasa.gov/ vision/universe/starsgalaxies/

life’s working definition.html),

accessed 3/17/2009.

2. Is Any Form of Life ReallySimple?

7. Princeton Weekly Bulletin, “Nuts, Boltsof Who We Are,” by Steven Schultz,

May 1, 2000, (http://www.princeton.edu/pr/pwb/00/0501/p/brain.shtml), accessed

3/27/2009.a. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology orMedicine 2002,” Press Release, Octo-

ber 7, 2002, (http://nobelprize.org/

nobel prizes/medicine/laureates/2002/press.html), accessed 3/27/2009.

8. “The Nobel Prize in Physiology or

Medicine 2002,” October 7, 2002.

9. Encyclopædia Britannica

“Cell,” “The MitochondriChloroplast,” subhead, “Tbiont Hypothesis.”

10. How Life Began—EvoluGeneses, p. 32.

11. Molecular Biology of thEdition, by Bruce Albertsp. 405.

12. Molecular Human Rep“The Role of Proteomics inthe Human Embryonic Seby M. G. Katz-Jaffe, S. M

D. K. Gardner, and W. B. S2009, p. 271.

13. Between Necessity and Searching for the Definitionof Life, by Radu Popa, 200

14. Between Necessity and Searching for the Definitionof Life, pp. 126-127.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

watchtower: the origin of life - five questions worth asking - 2010

Documents