THE SIMPLE CELL
THE SIMPLE CELL
Charles Darwin did not concern himself with the origin of life. His ardent supporter, Ernst Haeckel, considered a living cell to be so simple that it could spontaneously occur in mud on the bottom of the sea. Thus Darwin concentrated on his evolutionary tree assuming that the creation of life was a problem so simple that it would soon be solved. Recent scientific discoveries, however, reveal that the “simple cell” is not so simple after all. Further, even after all these years, Wickipedia states: “The origin of life on earth is a scientific problem which is not yet solved”.
Michael J. Behe published “Darwin’s Black Box” in 1996. In this book he cites many examples of recent discoveries in the field of micro-biology disproving Haeckel and showing great complexity in the “simple cell”. This calls into question the possibility that natural selection can explain such complexity. One interesting example is “bacterial flagellum”. This has been discovered to contain a miniature electric motor different from all other organic systems that produce mechanical motion. This motor is not powered by energy stored as ATP molecules, but by ions flowing across the outer cell membranes. This microscopic motor, of course, is incredibly complex.
Behe uses the concept of irreducible complexity to illustrate his point. This concept can be illustrated by a mouse trap. The mouse trap is “simple” and consists of only a base, hammer, spring, and catch, or holding bar. Yet, if even one of these parts is missing the “simple” mouse trap doesn’t work. The flagellum, by comparison, is not “simple”. It has approximately 240 distinct proteins necessary to make it work. It is obviously much more complicated than a mouse trap. These proteins essential to the function of the flagellum carry the signals that turn the motor on and off, form joints that provide movement, velocity, and direction, Etc. This microscopic motor even operates a miniature propeller that spins as many as 1,500 revolutions per minute. Behe points out that since all of these components are necessary for the flagellum to work, it could not have evolved step by step. While many evolutionists reject Behe’s work out of hand, Professor Peter van Inwagen of the University of Notre Dame disagrees. He warns that to ignore, misrepresent, or ridicule these recent discoveries will prove evolutionists to be driven more by ideology than by science.
Dr. Stephen Meyer points out that Darwin’s method of understanding history was greatly influenced by Charles Lyell. Lyell believed that the present is the key to the past. History therefore is best explained by what we know is happening today. To Meyer, the explanation of the vast amount of information in the cell is obvious. The only way we get information today is from a mind. This is the information age! Every where we turn there are vast amounts of information. But books and newspapers do not occur by random acts, they are produced by someone’s mind. Bill Gates observed that the programing of the flagellum is much like computer programs, only much more complicated. Computer programs do not write themselves or occur by accident, they are produced by a mind. Today’s science reveals that for every successful program, there is a programmer.
Freud, as you know, regarded God as an illusion based on the infantile need for a powerful father figure. But this argument works both ways. Just as some hope there is a God, others hope there isn’t. Atheist Thomas Nagel of N. Y. University confessed: “I speak from experience, being strongly subject to this fear myself: I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-informed people I know are religious believers. It isn’t just that I don’t believe in God and, naturally, hope that I’m right in my belief. It’s that I hope there is no God! I don’t want there to be a God . . . ” I believe is a God and this faith rests upon evidence for just as the heavens declare His glory, and even the “simple cell” displays His handiwork!