Intelligent Design Origin Of Life Video

Chemist James Tour offers a YouTube series on abiogenesis, treated as a form of magic

Spread the love

This is the first episode: 0 – Reasons for this Series:

In this compelling series of lectures on abiogenesis, James Tour’s riposte slices through both hype and myths using science to critique “science”, demonstrating how experts in the field truly remain clueless on the origin of life.

Twelve more episodes to go.

James Tour:

Professor Tour is the founder and principal of NanoJtech Consultants, LLC, performing technology assessments for the prospective investor. Tour’s intellectual property has been the seed for the formation of several other companies including Weebit (silicon oxide electronic memory), Dotz (graphene quantum), Zeta Energy (batteries), NeuroCords (spinal cord repair), Xerient (treatment of pancreas cancer), LIGC Application Ltd. (laser-induced graphene), Nanorobotics (molecular nanomachines in medicine) Universal Matter Ltd. (US) and Universal Matter Inc. (Canada) (flash graphene synthesis), Roswell Biotechnologies (molecular electronic DNA sequencing) and Rust Patrol (corrosion inhibitors).

At Google Scholar:

Citations

All 109646

Since 2016 43767

h-index 152 99

i10-index 679 491

We recommend that inveterate yay-hoos find someone else to attack.

13 Replies to “Chemist James Tour offers a YouTube series on abiogenesis, treated as a form of magic

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    Oh Goody, not only did ‘Professor Dave’, (a former high school teacher, turned ‘Youtuber’, who only has a masters degree in Chemistry), state ‘numerous gross scientific inaccuracies’ in response to Dr. Tour, (who’s scientific shoelaces ‘Professor Dave’ is not even worthy to tie’), but ‘Professor Dave’ also attacks Dr. Tour’s for his belief in Christianity,,,

    Professor Dave stated, “He (Dr. Tour, besides rejecting abiogenesis,) is even more emphatic about something else,” (he then quotes Dr. Tour stating his faith in Jesus Christ), then “Professor Dave’ condescending states, “that should give you a better picture of the headspace he (Dr. Tour) is coming from”.

    I guess ‘Professor Dave’s’ reasoning is that if someone can be so gullible as to believe that Jesus Christ actually did rise from the dead then any further thoughts that Dr. Tour might have on whether nature, all by its lonesome, is capable of producing life can be safely dismissed.

    Apparently, ‘Professor Dave’ feels so confident that it is self-evidently true that Jesus did not rise from the dead that ‘Professor Dave’ can’t be bothered with stating his exact reasoning for not believing Jesus rose from the dead and so he can just dismiss the entire idea with smug condescension.

    But be that as it may, it might interest ‘Professor Dave’ to know that the ‘headspace’ of Christianity, (not the ‘headspace’ of any other worldview), was the necessary ‘headspace’ that was needed for the founding of modern science in the first place,

    The Christian Origins of Science – Jack Kerwick – Apr 15, 2017
    Excerpt: Though it will doubtless come as an enormous shock to such Christophobic atheists as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and their ilk, it is nonetheless true that one especially significant contribution that Christianity made to the world is that of science.,,,
    Stark is blunt: “Real science arose only once: in Europe”—in Christian Europe. “China, Islam, India, and ancient Greece and Rome each had a highly developed alchemy. But only in Europe did alchemy develop into chemistry. By the same token, many societies developed elaborate systems of astrology, but only in Europe did astrology develop into astronomy.”,,,
    In summation, Stark writes: “The rise of science was not an extension of classical learning. It was the natural outgrowth of Christian doctrine: nature exists because it was created by God. In order to love and honor God, it is necessary to fully appreciate the wonders of his handiwork. Because God is perfect, his handiwork functions in accord with immutable principles. By the full use of our God-given powers of reason and observation, it ought to be possible to discover these principles.”
    He concludes: “These were the crucial ideas that explain why science arose in Christian Europe and nowhere else.”
    https://townhall.com/columnists/jackkerwick/2017/04/15/the-christian-origins-of-science-n2313593

    In fact, the ‘headspace’ of ‘Professor Dave’s very own worldview, atheistic naturalism, besides not being the worldview that brought modern science Into existence, is also the ‘headspace’ that ends up driving modern science itself into catastrophic epistemological failure.

    Although the Darwinian atheist firmly believes he is on the terra firma of science, (in his appeal, even demand, for naturalistic explanations), the fact of the matter is that Darwinian atheists are adrift in an ocean of fantasy and imagination with no discernible anchor for reality to grab on to:

    Basically, because of reductive materialism (and/or methodological naturalism), the atheistic materialist (who believes Darwinian evolution to be true) is forced to claim that he is merely a ‘neuronal illusion’ (Coyne, Dennett, etc..), who has the illusion of free will (Harris), who has unreliable, (i.e. illusory), beliefs about reality (Plantinga), who has illusory perceptions of reality (Hoffman), who, since he has no real time empirical evidence substantiating his grandiose claims, must make up illusory “just so stories” with the illusory, and impotent, ‘designer substitute’ of natural selection (Behe, Gould, Sternberg), so as to ‘explain away’ the appearance (i.e. the illusion) of design (Crick, Dawkins), and who also must make up illusory meanings and purposes for his life since the hopelessness of the nihilism inherent in his atheistic worldview is simply too much for him to bear (Weikart), and who must also hold morality to be subjective and illusory since he has rejected God (Craig, Kreeft). Who, since beauty cannot be grounded within his materialistic worldview, must also hold beauty itself to be illusory (Darwin).
    Bottom line, nothing is truly real in the atheist’s worldview, least of all, beauty, morality, meaning and purposes for life.,,,
    Darwinian Materialism and/or Methodological Naturalism vs. Reality – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaksmYceRXM

    Thus, although the Darwinian Atheist, such as ‘Professor Dave’, may firmly believe that he is on the terra firma of science (in his appeal, even demand, for naturalistic explanations over and above God as a viable explanation), the fact of the matter is that, when examining the details of his materialistic/naturalistic worldview, it is found that Darwinists/Atheists themselves are adrift in an ocean of fantasy and imagination with no discernible anchor for reality to grab on to.

    It would be hard to fathom a worldview more antagonistic to modern science, indeed more antagonistic to reality itself, than Atheistic materialism and/or methodological naturalism have turned out to be.

    2 Corinthians 10:5
    Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;

    It also appears that ‘Professor Dave’ did not learn much history when he got his masters degree in Chemistry.

    Louis Pasteur, who, among many other notable achievements in his lifetime, was responsible for disproving the doctrine of spontaneous generation. (which ‘Professor Dave apparently still believes in to some extent),

    Louis Pasteur – December 27, 1822 – September 28, 1895) was a French biologist, microbiologist, and chemist renowned for his discoveries of the principles of vaccination, microbial fermentation, and pasteurization. He is remembered for his remarkable breakthroughs in the causes and prevention of diseases, and his discoveries have saved many lives ever since. He reduced mortality from puerperal fever and created the first vaccines for rabies and anthrax.
    His medical discoveries provided direct support for the germ theory of disease and its application in clinical medicine. He is best known to the general public for his invention of the technique of treating milk and wine to stop bacterial contamination, a process now called pasteurization. He is regarded as one of the three main founders of bacteriology, together with Ferdinand Cohn and Robert Koch, and has been called a “father of bacteriology”[5] and the “father of microbiology”[6][7][page needed], though the latter appelation has also been applied to Antonie van Leeuwenhoek.
    Pasteur was responsible for disproving the doctrine of spontaneous generation. He performed experiments that showed that, without contamination, microorganisms could not develop.,,,
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Pasteur

    Apparently unbeknownst to ‘Professor Dave’, Louis Pasteur himself, who disproved the doctrine of spontaneous generation, was a Christian who held that “Posterity will one day laugh at the foolishness of modern materialistic philosophers.”

    Louis Pasteur on life, matter, and spontaneous generation – June 21, 2015
    “Science brings men nearer to God.,,
    Posterity will one day laugh at the foolishness of modern materialistic philosophers. The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator. I pray while I am engaged at my work in the laboratory.,,
    The Greeks understood the mysterious power of the below things. They are the ones who gave us one of the most beautiful words in our language, the word enthusiasm: a God within.,,,
    I have been looking for spontaneous generation for twenty years without discovering it. No, I do not judge it impossible. But what allows you to make it the origin of life? You place matter before life and you decide that matter has existed for all eternity. How do you know that the incessant progress of science will not compel scientists to consider that life has existed during eternity, and not matter? You pass from matter to life because your intelligence of today cannot conceive things otherwise. How do you know that in ten thousand years, one will not consider it more likely that matter has emerged from life? You move from matter to life because your current intelligence, so limited compared to what will be the future intelligence of the naturalist, tells you that things cannot be understand otherwise. If you want to be among the scientific minds, what only counts is that you will have to get rid of a priori reasoning and ideas, and you will have to do necessary deductions not giving more confidence than we should to deductions from wild speculation.”
    [en francais, Pasteur et la philosophie, Patrice Pinet, Editions L’Harmattan, p. 63.]
    http://www.uncommondescent.com.....eneration/

    Perhaps ‘Professor Dave’ may someday have the honesty within himself to take a good hard look at his own ‘headspace’ of atheistic naturalism and realize that it is his own ‘headspace’ of atheistic naturalism, not Christianity, that should be condescendingly mocked and dismissed as self-evidently false.

    I hope that ‘Professor Dave also has the honesty within himself to watch Dr. Tour’s 12 part response to him and see exactly why his position is so untenable.

    Moreover, I would also hope that Professor Dave also has enough honesty to further investigate the claims of Christianity, with an open mind, and to see if they are true, instead of just smugly dismissing them before he even has a chance to weigh the evidence for himself.

    For instance, what about the ‘Shroud of Turin’ Professor Dave?

    The evidence for the Shroud’s authenticity keeps growing. (Timeline of facts) –
    What Is the Shroud of Turin? Facts & History Everyone Should Know – Myra Adams and Russ Breault – November 08, 2019
    https://www.christianity.com/wiki/jesus-christ/what-is-the-shroud-of-turin.html

    Basically, we have a clothe with a photographic negative image on it that was made well before photography was even invented. Moreover, the photographic negative image has a 3-Dimensional holographic nature to its image that was somehow encoded within the photographic negative well before holography was even known about. Moreover, even with our present day technology, we still cannot replicated the image in all its detail.?My question to atheists is this, if you truly believe some mad genius forger in the middle ages made this image, then please pray tell why did this mad genius save all his genius for this supposed forgery alone and not for, say, inventing photography itself since he surely would have required mastery of photography to pull off the forgery? Not to mention mastery of laser holography? Moreover, why did this hypothetical mad super-genius destroy all of his scientific instruments that he would have had to invent in order to make the image? Leonardo da Vinci would not have been worthy to tie the shoe laces of such a hypothetical mad genius!

    These are big questions to deal with. I’ve never seen any of the shroud-skeptics address this.
    We see claims that “the shroud is a forgery” and then the discussion ends with that. It seems obvious to me that the skeptics are afraid to go any further and are just relieved that they “silenced” the shroud.
    But wait – yes, who was this forger? We have 3-D, photographic image of amazing subtlety and refinement. Yes, it’s something that transcends the genius of Leonardo DaVinci. We continue to use 21st century technology just to try to reproduce it.
    But nobody knows the name or origin of this artistic genius? There is no evidence of a workshop or artistic guild where this innovative creation was designed? Nobody from history ever mentioned this person? This genius-artist only produced this one masterpiece work – a holographic image on a cloth (containing pollen traceable to Jerusalem)? It was not framed or put on display. Not sold to anyone. The artist got nothing from creating it. Even the name of the genius artist disappeared. He never influenced any other artists. No family, friends, artistic community – not even the parish church – ever knew or said who he was?
    Amazingly, we only discovered the true power of the image when we took a photo negative of it in the 20th century. Yes, where are the medieval instruments used to create it? Everything was just accidentally lost?
    – Silver Asiatic

    Verse:

    John 20
    3 So Peter and the other disciple started for the tomb. 4 Both were running, but the other disciple outran Peter and reached the tomb first. 5 He bent over and looked in at the strips of linen lying there but did not go in. 6 Then Simon Peter came along behind him and went straight into the tomb. He saw the strips of linen lying there, 7 as well as the cloth that had been wrapped around Jesus’ head. The cloth was still lying in its place, separate from the linen. 8 Finally the other disciple, who had reached the tomb first, also went inside. He saw and believed.

  2. 2
    Peter says:

    Romans 1:20
    For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that He made.

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    prologue episod starts at 7 PM central time

    Episode 0/13: Reasons // A Course on Abiogenesis by Dr. James Tour
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71dqAFUb-v0&feature=youtu.be
    In this prologue episode, Dr. James Tour explains why he is addressing abiogenesis and common misconceptions in this series of lectures. After providing the outline for the course, Dr. Tour provides a sneak peek of the upcoming critique.

  4. 4
    Querius says:

    Thanks, Bornagain77. Great quote by Pasteur!

    I can’t even imagine a lightweight like “Professor Dave” denigrating James Tour’s knowledge of biochemistry. This is insane! But I know that Tour would graciously offer Dave a conversation where he just would ask Dave a serious of humble questions. I’d imagine that eventually Dave would simply resort to an empty response of “it musta happened naturalistically somehow” to which Dr. Tour would just say “Show me how.” And Dave would say “I’m absolutely convinced someone will eventually find a way.” This exposes “Professor Dave’s” commitment to an ideology that cannot be supported by science.

    In my opinion, it would be far more rational to simply say that scientifically we have no idea and all our evidence points to the impossibility of abiogenesis.

    -Q

  5. 5
    BobRyan says:

    I have just two questions for Professor Dave, as well as anyone who wishes to discount anyone who disagrees with them as being beneath them. Since energy cannot be created by man or nature and energy cannot be destroyed by man or nature, does that mean energy does not exist? If energy exists, which we know it does, how did it come about if it cannot be created?

  6. 6
    bornagain77 says:

    No problem Querius.

    Given ‘Professor Dave’s’ severely misplaced confidence that science will someday, (in a completely naturalistic fashion), explain exactly where life came from, (and how it subsequently developed), one wonders if Critical Theory, which is currently being widely taught in colleges across America, (and which “breaks down your belief in pretty much everything you were raised with”), will ever make into the lecture halls of Darwinists.

    Postmodernism & Critical Theory; the Good, the Bad, the Traumatic.
    Excerpt: I remember waiting to talk to a professor one day after class when the girl ahead of me broke down crying. It was a poly-sci class, can’t remember which one, but I’m sure we were covering one more way in which the world is f*$^ed.
    What I do remember is that the topic of conversation was on Critical Theory and Postmodernism. Both of which can paint a dismal picture of the world.
    As an international relations student, Critical Theory was a core part of our curriculum and was used to deconstruct our narratives about the world in every field imaginable from our poly-sci classes to economics, history, anthropology, sociology, geography.
    One of the strengths of the theory is that it calls for input from a wide range of disciplines. We had to study them all.
    One of the difficulties in handling the theory is that it breaks down your belief in pretty much everything you were raised with. Many turned to heavy drinking, some of us had mental breakdowns, this girl sobbing wasn’t exactly something new.
    What was unique is that it happened in class and the professor’s response is still marked in my memory.
    “Critical Theory is incredibly difficult to process. There is a lot that is broken in the world and we don’t have answers for it. We’re still trying to figure out all the things going wrong. Maybe someday someone else will come along with answers.”
    I don’t often remember the way people say things. I’m more of a paraphraser but that moment has always stuck with me. In its own way, it felt prophetic.
    https://joshuaburkhart.medium.com/postmodernism-jordan-peterson-critical-theory-4759dbcd3729

    Given the dominance of atheistic naturalism on college campuses, I’m sure that many professors pushing Critical Theory on college campuses today are keen to attack Christian students in particular in an effort to “break down their belief in pretty much everything they were raised with”.

    And indeed, on these very pages of UD, many times Atheists have tried to link Christianity to “a lot that is broken in the world”,

    Defense against an atheist’s claim that Christianity is a murderous religion
    August 2020
    https://uncommondescent.com/evolution/a-university-of-arizona-prof-works-hard-to-make-darwinism-coincide-with-the-history-of-life/#comment-710157

    ,,,but in their attack on Christianity, it seems that the atheists here on UD never quite get around to critically analyzing their own Darwinian worldview to see if their worldview is, in fact, the main cause for “a lot that is broken in the world”.

    Take racial relations.

    Critical Race Theory is widely taught on college Campuses today, (and even taught in public schools and in large companies), and has been traced out as to root cause of much of the racial unrest in America today.

    Critical Race Theory, with its emphasis on highlighting what is wrong with our racial history (slavery, Joe Crow laws, etc..), and its neglecting of what we got right in our history (the Civil War, the Civil Rights Movement, etc..), ends up generating more racial unrest than it ever ends up healing.

    But what has been the main source for the healing of racial inequality in America? I’m pretty sure Critical Race Theory never gets around to honestly addressing this question.

    Well the source for the racial healing certainly has NOT been the Darwinian worldview.

    In fact, Darwin’s theory is inherently racist in its theoretical construct and has been the main source of much racial inequality in the modern world.

    In fact, the subtitle of Darwin’s first book ‘Origin of Species’ is “the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”.

    And Darwin’s second book “Descent of Man” spells out the racism inherent in his theory far more explicitly than his first book did.

    “Not only does Darwin believe in white supremacy, he offers a biological explanation for it, namely that white people are further evolved. He writes that the “western nations of Europe … now so immeasurably surpass their former savage progenitors and stand at the summit of civilization” (178). Darwin imagines that Europeans are more advanced versions of the rest of the world. As previously mentioned, this purported superiority justified to Darwin the domination of inferior races by Europeans. As white Europeans “exterminate and replace” the world’s “savage races,” and as great apes go extinct, Darwin says that the gap between civilized man and his closest evolutionary ancestor will widen. The gap will eventually be between civilized man “and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla” (201). Read that last line again if you missed it: Darwin’s theory claims that Africans and Australians are more closely related to apes than Europeans are. The spectrum of organisms is a hierarchy here, with white Europeans at the top and apes at the bottom. In Darwin’s theory, colored people fall somewhere in between. Modern human is essentially restricted only to white Europeans, with all other races viewed as somehow sub-human…”
    … “Now I understand why I’ve never been asked in a biology class to read the original text of Darwin’s theories: Our contemporary reverence for Darwin’s gentlemanliness and the pure scientific brilliance of his theories is an overly optimistic illusion that shatters upon a closer look at his publications.”
    – Austin Anderson, “The Dark Side of Darwinism”
    https://uncommondescent.com/darwinism/an-academic-discovers-the-dark-side-of-darwinism/

    Darwinists today try to distance Darwin’s theory from racism, but racism is not just some extra accessory to Darwin’s theory that can be easily discarded, but racism is indeed integral and crucial to Darwin’s theory. As Professor Richard Weikart explains, racism is a “Not a Bug but a Feature” of Darwin’s theory.

    Darwinism and “No Lives Matter” -June 25, 2020
    Excerpt: As Professor Weikart explains, Darwin’s racism is not incidental to his case for evolution. It’s not as if he was merely a product of his time, with the reprehensible attitudes held by other upper class Brits when he wrote his books. Yes, he was anti-slavery. And yes, he embodied the racism that came before him. He didn’t invent it. But he also used it as “evidence” for his theory. He believed that different races of humans represented biological variations (in intelligence, moral capacity, and more) on which the natural selection process could work, just as it could on finch beaks. His conclusion of a racial hierarchy with Africans at the bottom, his projection of eventual racial “extermination,” were no stray inference. The documentaries Human Zoos and The Biology of the Second Reich show how Darwinian theory continued to motivate racism, eugenic drives, and genocide into the 20th century.
    Not a Bug but a Feature
    Weikart continues by noting that later Darwinists (such as Peter Singer) drew logical consequences from evolution, including that since all human beings are the product of random natural forces, they possess no special dignity. Human life is not precious. Or to put it another way, via John Zmirak: NO LIVES MATTER. By contrast, the religious traditions that evolutionary theory pushes aside possess ample reason for respecting humans universally as equals, of identical value and dignity, no matter the color of their skin. Of course, there have been “religious” racists. But that is a contradiction with their professed faith. Those who call for vandalizing churches because of depictions of a “white” Jesus don’t understand this.
    https://evolutionnews.org/2020/06/darwinism-and-no-lives-matter/

    Darwinists, and atheists in general, simply have no basis within their Darwinian worldview for regarding men as equal. Whereas Christians hold it as ‘self evidently true’ that all men are created equal by God.

    Words & Dirt – Quotes 10-21-2015 – by Miles Raymer
    Excerpt: Let us try to translate the most famous line of the American Declaration of Independence into biological terms:
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
    According to the science of biology, people were not ‘created’. They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are ‘equal’? Evolution is based on difference, not on equality. Every person carries a somewhat different genetic code, and is exposed from birth to different environmental influences. This leads to the development of different qualities that carry with them different chances of survival. ‘Created equal’ should therefore be translated into ‘evolved differently’.,,,
    So here is that line from the American Declaration of Independence translated into biological terms:
    We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men evolved differently, that they are born with certain mutable characteristics, and that among these are life and the pursuit of pleasure.
    http://www.words-and-dirt.com/.....0-21-2015/

    And indeed, it was men of great Christian faith, (i.e. William Wilberforce, Abraham Lincoln, Martin Luther King, etc..) that ended slavery and brought forth the Civil rights movement. It was certainly not Darwinists who brought forth these good and nobel changes in America.

    In fact, Darwin’s theory severely hampered, and set back, the efforts of Christian reformers to bring about racial equality in the world. As the following article states, “Christian reformers had spent decades in the early 19th century teaching Britain to view non-European races as their equals before God. In a matter of years, Darwin swept not only God off the table, but also the value of people of every race with him.

    What Your Biology Teacher Didn’t Tell You About Charles Darwin – Phil Moore / April 19, 2017
    Excerpt: ,,, the British thinker who justified genocide.,,,
    The full title of his seminal 1859 book was On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. He followed up more explicitly in The Descent of Man, where he spelled out his racial theory:
    “The Western nations of Europe . . . now so immeasurably surpass their former savage progenitors [that they] stand at the summit of civilization. . . . The civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races through the world.”
    – C. Darwin,,,
    Christian reformers had spent decades in the early 19th century teaching Britain to view non-European races as their equals before God. In a matter of years, Darwin swept not only God off the table, but also the value of people of every race with him.
    Enabling Genocide
    Victorian Britain was too willing to accept Darwinian evolution as its gospel of overseas expansion. Darwin is still celebrated on the back of the British £10 note for his discovery of many new species on his visit to Australia; what’s been forgotten, though, is his contemptible attitude—due to his beliefs about natural selection—toward the Aborigines he found there. When The Melbourne Review used Darwin’s teachings to justify the genocide of indigenous Australians in 1876, he didn’t try and stop them. When the Australian newspaper argued that “the inexorable law of natural selection [justifies] exterminating the inferior Australian and Maori races”—that “the world is better for it” since failure to do so would be “promoting the non-survival of the fittest, protecting the propagation of the imprudent, the diseased, the defective, and the criminal”—it was Christian missionaries who raised an outcry on behalf of this forgotten genocide. Darwin simply commented, “I do not know of a more striking instance of the comparative rate of increase of a civilized over a savage race.”,,,
    https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/what-your-biology-teacher-didnt-tell-you-about-charles-darwin

    Moreover, the Darwinian presupposition that radical genetic differences would be found that separate races from one another is now known to be, scientifically speaking, ‘not even wrong’.

    Modern Human Diversity – Genetics
    Excerpt: Early studies of human diversity showed that most genetic diversity was found between individuals rather than between populations or continents and that variation in human diversity is best described by geographic gradients, or clines. A wide-ranging study published in 2004 found that 87.6% percent of the total modern human genetic diversity isaccounted for by the differences between individuals, and only 9.2% between continents. In general, 5%–15% of genetic variation occurs between large groups living on different continents, with the remaining majority of the variation occurring within such groups (Lewontin 1972; Jorde et al. 2000a; Hinds et al. 2005). These results show that when individuals are sampled from around the globe, the pattern seen is not a matter of discrete clusters – but rather gradients in genetic variation (gradual geographic variations in allele frequencies) that extend over the entire world. Therefore,there is no reason to assume that major genetic discontinuities exist between peoples on different continents or “races.” The authors of the 2004 study say that they ‘see no reason to assume that “races” represent any units of relevance for understanding human genetic history. An exception may be genes where different selection regimes have acted in different geographical regions. However, even in those cases, the genetic discontinuities seen are generally not “racial” or continental in nature but depend on historical and cultural factors that are more local in nature’ (Serre and P??bo 2004: 1683-1684).
    https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/human-skin-color-variation/modern-human-diversity-genetics

  7. 7
    bornagain77 says:

    In fact, Humans are now, ‘surprisingly’, found to be far more genetically distinct from one another than races are genetically distinct from one another. As the following article states, “over half of all genes in an individual, around 9,000 of 17,500, occur uniquely in that one person – and (we) are therefore individual in the truest sense of the word.”

    Scientifically speaking, these findings are simply devastating to Darwin’s theory, as the article goes on to state, “”We need to fundamentally rethink the view of genes that every schoolchild has learned since Gregor Mendel’s time.”,,,

    Duality in the human genome – November 28, 2014
    Excerpt: The results show that most genes can occur in many different forms within a population: On average, about 250 different forms of each gene exist. The researchers found around four million different gene forms just in the 400 or so genomes they analysed. This figure is certain to increase as more human genomes are examined. More than 85 percent of all genes have no predominant form which occurs in more than half of all individuals. This enormous diversity means that over half of all genes in an individual, around 9,000 of 17,500, occur uniquely in that one person – and are therefore individual in the truest sense of the word.
    The gene, as we imagined it, exists only in exceptional cases. “We need to fundamentally rethink the view of genes that every schoolchild has learned since Gregor Mendel’s time.”,,,
    According to the researchers, mutations of genes are not randomly distributed between the parental chromosomes. They found that 60 percent of mutations affect the same chromosome set and 40 percent both sets. Scientists refer to these as cis and trans mutations, respectively. Evidently, an organism must have more cis mutations, where the second gene form remains intact. “It’s amazing how precisely the 60:40 ratio is maintained. It occurs in the genome of every individual – almost like a magic formula,” says Hoehe.
    http://medicalxpress.com/news/.....enome.html

    i.e. So much for Richard Dawkins entire ‘selfish gene’ concept!

    Besides Darwin’s theory being so wrong in its presuppositions about genetics and race, and besides Darwin’s theory severely setting back the efforts of Christian reformers to bring about racial equality, It is also hard to put into words, (because of the sheer scope of atrocities committed by Darwinists), just how horrid the consequences have been for human society in general because of Darwin’s theory.

    In his book “Origin of Species” Charles Darwin himself stated that,

    “One general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die.”
    – Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species – page 266

    That statement should send shudders down the spine of anyone who is not a complete psychopath.

    And please note how closely Darwin’s ‘general law’ of letting “the strongest live and the weakest die” mirrored Hitler’s own views.

    Specifically Hitler stated that, “A stronger race will oust that which has grown weak; for the vital urge, in its ultimate form, will burst asunder all the absurd chains of this so-called humane consideration for the individual and will replace it with the humanity of Nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to give place to the strong.”

    “But if that policy be carried out the final results must be that such a nation will eventually terminate its own existence on this earth; for though man may defy the eternal laws of procreation during a certain period, vengeance will follow sooner or later. A stronger race will oust that which has grown weak; for the vital urge, in its ultimate form, will burst asunder all the absurd chains of this so-called humane consideration for the individual and will replace it with the humanity of Nature, which wipes out what is weak in order to give place to the strong.”
    – Adolf Hitler – Mein Kampf – Chapter 4

    In fact, Hitler once stated that “Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of human failure.”

    Hitler on Religion
    Selections from Hitler’s Table Talk
    Excerpt: “Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of human failure.”
    Adolf Hitler – – Hitler’s Table Talk, a series of informal, private conversations among Hitler and his closest associates, as recorded by Martin Bormann. The ex tempore remarks excerpted above are from July 1941 to June 1942, most late at night or in early morning.

    And indeed, as Sir Arthur Keith noted in 1947, shortly after WWII had ended, “the law of Christ is incompatible with the law of evolution as far as the law of evolution has worked hitherto. Nay, the two laws are at war with each other; the law of Christ can never prevail until the law of evolution is destroyed.”

    “for, as we have just seen, the ways of national evolution, both in the past and in the present, are cruel, brutal, ruthless, and without mercy.,,, Meantime let me say that the conclusion I have come to is this: the law of Christ is incompatible with the law of evolution as far as the law of evolution has worked hitherto. Nay, the two laws are at war with each other; the law of Christ can never prevail until the law of evolution is destroyed.”
    Sir Arthur Keith, (1866 — 1955) Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons – Evolution and Ethics (1947) p.15

    I have seen Darwinian atheists fight tooth and nail against the notion that Darwinian evolution was behind the genocides that Hitler orchestrated, but, as historian Richard Weikart has thoroughly documented, the fact of matter is that, “The historical evidence is overwhelming that human evolution was an integral part of Nazi racial ideology.”

    The Role Of Darwinism In Nazi Racial Thought – Richard Weikart – October 2013
    Excerpt: The historical evidence is overwhelming that human evolution was an integral part of Nazi racial ideology.
    https://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/History/Faculty/Weikart/Darwinism-in-Nazi-Racial-Thought.pdf

    From Darwin to Hitler – Richard Weikart – lecture video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_5EwYpLD6A
    In his book, From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethics, Eugenics, and Racism in Germany (2004), Richard Weikart explains the revolutionary impact Darwinism had on ethics and morality. Darwinism played a key role in the rise not only of eugenics (a movement wanting to control human reproduction to improve the human species), but also on euthanasia, infanticide, abortion, and racial extermination. This was especially important in Germany, since Hitler built his view of ethics on Darwinian principles.

    Besides Darwin’s theory being behind the Nazi’s racial ideology, Darwin’s theory also provided the supposed ‘scientific’ basis of all the other Marxist, Socialist, and/or Communist ideologies of the last century.

    In 1848 Friedrich Engels co-authored ‘The Communist Manifesto’ with Karl Marx. Upon reading Darwin’s book ‘Origin of Species’ in 1860, Marx wrote to Engels that “This is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.” And in another letter to another ‘comrade’ Marx further wrote that “Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history.”

    Darwin on Marx – by Richard William Nelson | Apr 18, 2010
    Excerpt: Marx and Engels immediately recognized the significance of Darwin’s theory. Within weeks of the publication of The Origin of Species in November 1859, Engels wrote to Marx –
    “Darwin, by the way, whom I’m reading just now, is absolutely splendid. There was one aspect of teleology that had yet to be demolished, and that has now been done…. One does, of course, have to put up with the crude English method.”
    Marx wrote back to Engels on December 19, 1860 –
    “This is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view.”
    The Origin of Species became the natural cause basis for Marx’s emerging class struggle movement. In a letter to comrade Ferdinand Lassalle, on January 16, 1861, Marx wrote –
    “Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history.”
    Marx inscribed “sincere admirer” in Darwin’s copy of Marx’s first volume of Das Kapital in 1867. The importance of the theory of evolution for Communism was critical. In Das Kapital, Marx wrote –
    “Darwin has interested us in the history of Nature’s Technology, i.e., in the formation of the organs of plants and animals, which organs serve as instruments of production for sustaining life. Does not the history of the productive organs of man, of organs that are the material basis of all social organisation, deserve equal attention?”
    To acknowledge Darwin’s influence, Marx asked to dedicate Das Kapital to Darwin.
    https://www.darwinthenandnow.com/2010/04/darwin-on-marx/

    In fact, Vladimir Lenin himself kept a little statue of an ape staring at a human skull on his desk. As you can see, the ape is sitting on a pile of books which includes Darwin’s book, “Origin of Species”.

    “V.I. Lenin, creator of the Soviet totalitarian state, kept a little statue on his desk—an ape sitting on a pile of books including mine [The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle of Life], gazing at a human skull. And Mao Zedong, butcher of the tens of millions of his own countrymen, who regarded the German ‘Darwinismus’ writings as the foundation of Chinese ‘scientific socialism.’ This disciple mandated my works as reading material for the indoctrination phase of his lethal Great Leap Forward.”
    Nickell John Romjue, I, Charles Darwin, p. 45

    Here is a picture of what the little statue on Lenin’s desk looked like:

    Hugo Rheinhold’s Monkey – picture
    https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/61Y8HpKyHOL._SL1009_.jpg

    Likewise Joseph Stalin, while a student at a seminary school of all places, was also heavily influenced by Darwinism. Specifically Stalin, while at seminary told a friend, ‘You know, they are fooling us, there is no God’,,, ‘I’ll lend you a book to read’,,, ‘Darwin. You must read it,’

    Stalin’s Brutal Faith
    Excerpt: At a very early age, while still a pupil in the ecclesiastical school, Comrade Stalin developed a critical mind and revolutionary sentiments. He began to read Darwin and became an atheist.
    G. Glurdjidze, a boyhood friend of Stalin’s, relates:
    “I began to speak of God, Joseph heard me out, and after a moment’s silence, said:
    “‘You know, they are fooling us, there is no God. . . .’
    “I was astonished at these words, I had never heard anything like it before.
    “‘How can you say such things, Soso?’ I exclaimed.
    “‘I’ll lend you a book to read; it will show you that the world and all living things are quite different from what you imagine, and all this talk about God is sheer nonsense,’ Joseph said.
    “‘What book is that?’ I enquired.
    “‘Darwin. You must read it,’ Joseph impressed on me” 1
    1 E. Yaroslavsky, Landmarks in the Life of Stalin (Moscow: Foreign Languages Publishing house, 1940), pp. 8-12. ,,,
    http://www.icr.org/article/stalins-brutal-faith/

  8. 8
    bornagain77 says:

    As well Chairman Mao, who outdid Hitler and Stalin in the monstrous evil that he committed,,,

    Chairman MAO: Genocide Master (Black Book of Communism)
    “…Many scholars and commentators have referenced my total of 174,000,000 for the democide (genocide and mass murder) of the last century. I’m now trying to get word out that I’ve had to make a major revision in my total due to two books. I’m now convinced that Stalin exceeded Hitler in monstrous evil, and Mao beat out Stalin….”
    http://wadias.in/site/arzan/bl.....de-master/

    , Chairman Mao was also deeply influenced by Darwin’s theory. In fact, as the following article states, Chairman Mao is known to have regarded Darwin and his disciple Huxley as his two favourite authors.

    Darwin’s impact—the bloodstained legacy of evolution
    Excerpt: Chairman Mao is known to have regarded Darwin and his disciple Huxley as his two favourite authors.
    https://creation.com/deconstructing-darwin-darwins-impact

    Darwin and Mao: The Influence of Evolutionary Thought on Modern China – 2/13/2013
    https://nonnobis.weebly.com/blog/darwin-and-mao-the-influence-of-evolutionary-thought-on-modern-china

    The unmitigated horror unleashed on the world by these men, (who all found strong support for their socialistic/marxist ideologies in Darwin’s theory), would be hard to exaggerate. Here’s is a conservative estimate of the deaths that were inflicted upon mankind by these Godless men when they took control of their respective countries:

    “169,202,000 Murdered: Summary and Conclusions [20th Century Democide]
    I BACKGROUND
    2. The New Concept of Democide [Definition of Democide]
    3. Over 133,147,000 Murdered: Pre-Twentieth Century Democide
    II 128,168,000 VICTIMS: THE DEKA-MEGAMURDERERS
    4. 61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State
    5. 35,236,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill
    6. 20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State
    7. 10,214,000 Murdered: The Depraved Nationalist Regime
    III 19,178,000 VICTIMS: THE LESSER MEGA-MURDERERS
    8. 5,964,000 Murdered: Japan’s Savage Military
    9. 2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State
    10. 1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey’s Genocidal Purges
    11. 1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
    12. 1,585,000 Murdered: Poland’s Ethnic Cleansing
    13. 1,503,000 Murdered: The Pakistani Cutthroat State
    14. 1,072,000 Murdered: Tito’s Slaughterhouse
    IV 4,145,000 VICTIMS: SUSPECTED MEGAMURDERERS
    15. 1,663,000 Murdered? Orwellian North Korea
    16. 1,417,000 Murdered? Barbarous Mexico
    17. 1,066,000 Murdered? Feudal Russia”
    http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM

    This is, in reality, probably just a drop in the bucket. Who knows how many undocumented murders there actually were. And that figure also doesn’t count all the millions of abortions from around the world that have resulted from the undermining of the sanctity of human life when Darwin’s theory burst onto the scene.

    How Darwin’s Theory Changed the World
    Rejection of Judeo-Christian values
    Excerpt: Weikart explains how accepting Darwinist dogma shifted society’s thinking on human life: “Before Darwinism burst onto the scene in the mid-nineteenth century, the idea of the sanctity of human life was dominant in European thought and law (though, as with all ethical principles, not always followed in practice). Judeo-Christian ethics proscribed the killing of innocent human life, and the Christian churches explicitly forbade murder, infanticide, abortion, and even suicide.
    “The sanctity of human life became enshrined in classical liberal human rights ideology as ‘the right to life,’ which according to John Locke and the United States Declaration of Independence, was one of the supreme rights of every individual” (p. 75).
    Only in the late nineteenth and especially the early twentieth century did significant debate erupt over issues relating to the sanctity of human life, especially infanticide, euthanasia, abortion, and suicide. It was no mere coincidence that these contentious issues emerged at the same time that Darwinism was gaining in influence. Darwinism played an important role in this debate, for it altered many people’s conceptions of the importance and value of human life, as well as the significance of death” (ibid.).
    http://www.gnmagazine.org/issu.....-world.htm

    At 1,200,000, Abortion is the leading cause of deaths each year in the USA – graph
    http://skepchick.org/wp-conten.....704889.jpg

    Thus in conclusion, although ‘Professor Dave’ is especially critical of Dr. Tour’s faith in Jesus Christ, it might greatly behoove ‘Professor Dave’ to apply some of that same withering criticism to his own Darwinian worldview and ask himself how he could have possibly been so wrong for so long in his foundational beliefs about the world? Or does the criticism of ‘Critical Theory’, where the criticism “breaks down your belief in pretty much everything you were raised with”, only work one way in ‘Critical Theory’, i.e. against Christianity and not against Darwinism?

    It seems apparent to me that Christianity fairs far better from such withering criticism than Darwin’s theory ever does.

    Just a modicum of honest criticism brings the entire Darwinian house of cards tumbling down.

    So again, does ‘Professor Dave’ have the honesty within himself to honestly criticize his own worldview and see how it stacks up against Christianity?

  9. 9
    Querius says:

    Thanks for the additional quotes and comments, Bornagain77.

    “Professor Dave” reminds me of some of my more opinionated and dismissive college professors. It’s truly sad how they seem to get satisfaction from destroying young lives, making them as miserable as they. It’s like a wicked elementary school teacher making a first grader cry from their describing how every one of them will die and how life is completely pointless. Or politicizing them with selected distortions submitted in their authority as “facts.”

    I remember asking a biology professor about Darwin’s theory regarding racism and was assured that the human races had nothing to do with evolution and it was a mistake to misinterpret Darwin this way. But if evolution is true, then all random changes in the human genome tend toward the advancement of the genome, with the latest drift being the result of survival of the fittest. This is inescapable as eugenists and Marxists historically found obvious.

    As a Christian, I find these conclusions abhorrent. Fortunately, it turns out to be bad science and bad politics (“but that wasn’t true socialism”).

    -Q

  10. 10
    bornagain77 says:

    At the 24 minute mark of his video Dr. Tour quotes Dr. Brian Miller.

    “‘Professor Dave’ argues that the origin of life does not face thermodynamic hurdles. He states that natural systems often spontaneously increase in order, such as water freezing or soap molecules forming micelles (e.g., spheres or bilayers), He is making the very common mistake that he fails to recognize that the formation of the cell represents both a dramatic decrease in entropy and an equally dramatic decrease in energy. In contrast, water freezing represents both a decrease in entropy but also a decrease in energy.
    More specifically, the process of freezing releases heat that increases the entropy of the surrounding environment by an amount greater than the entropy decrease of the water molecule forming the rigid structure.
    Likewise, soap molecules coalescing into micelles represents a net increase of entropy since the surrounding water molecules significantly increase in their number of degrees of freedom.
    No system without assistance ever moves both toward lower entropy and higher energy which is required for the formation of a cell.”
    – Brian Miller, Ph. D. – MIT
    – Episode 0/13: Reasons // A Course on Abiogenesis by Dr. James Tour
    https://youtu.be/71dqAFUb-v0?t=1434

    To emphasize, “No system without assistance ever moves both toward lower entropy and higher energy which is required for the formation of a cell.”

    So exactly how does ‘nature’ move toward lower entropy and higher energy in order to form a cell?

    Well. it is by an Intelligence imparting (positional) information into ‘nature’.

    As the following 2010 experimental realization of Maxwell’s demon thought experiment demonstrated, it is knowledge of a particle’s location and/or position that converts information into energy.

    Maxwell’s demon demonstration turns information into energy – November 2010
    Excerpt: Scientists in Japan are the first to have succeeded in converting information into free energy in an experiment that verifies the “Maxwell demon” thought experiment devised in 1867.,,, In Maxwell’s thought experiment the demon creates a temperature difference simply from information about the gas molecule temperatures and without transferring any energy directly to them.,,, Until now, demonstrating the conversion of information to energy has been elusive, but University of Tokyo physicist Masaki Sano and colleagues have succeeded in demonstrating it in a nano-scale experiment. In a paper published in Nature Physics they describe how they coaxed a Brownian particle to travel upwards on a “spiral-staircase-like” potential energy created by an electric field solely on the basis of information on its location. As the particle traveled up the staircase it gained energy from moving to an area of higher potential, and the team was able to measure precisely how much energy had been converted from information.
    http://www.physorg.com/news/20.....nergy.html

    And as the following 2010 article stated about the preceding experiment, “This is a beautiful experimental demonstration that information has a thermodynamic content,”

    Demonic device converts information to energy – 2010
    Excerpt: “This is a beautiful experimental demonstration that information has a thermodynamic content,” says Christopher Jarzynski, a statistical chemist at the University of Maryland in College Park. In 1997, Jarzynski formulated an equation to define the amount of energy that could theoretically be converted from a unit of information2; the work by Sano and his team has now confirmed this equation. “This tells us something new about how the laws of thermodynamics work on the microscopic scale,” says Jarzynski.
    http://www.scientificamerican......rts-inform

    In short, it is immaterial information that is imparted by an Intelligence into nature that allows life to operate in a state that is far from thermodynamic equilibrium, i.e. that allows life to move toward “both toward lower entropy and higher energy” at the same time.

    As Andy McIntosh, professor of thermodynamics and combustion theory at the University of Leeds, stated, “Information has its definition outside the matter and energy on which it sits, and furthermore constrains it (the polymers of life) to operate in a highly non-equilibrium thermodynamic environment. This proposal resolves the thermodynamic issues and invokes the correct paradigm for understanding the vital area of thermodynamic/organisational interactions,”

    Information and Thermodynamics in Living Systems – Andy C. McIntosh – 2013
    Excerpt: ,,, information is in fact non-material and that the coded information systems (such as, but not restricted to the coding of DNA in all living systems) is not defined at all by the biochemistry or physics of the molecules used to store the data. Rather than matter and energy defining the information sitting on the polymers of life, this approach posits that the reverse is in fact the case. Information has its definition outside the matter and energy on which it sits, and furthermore constrains it to operate in a highly non-equilibrium thermodynamic environment. This proposal resolves the thermodynamic issues and invokes the correct paradigm for understanding the vital area of thermodynamic/organisational interactions, which despite the efforts from alternative paradigms has not given a satisfactory explanation of the way information in systems operates.,,,
    http://www.worldscientific.com.....08728_0008
    Andrew McIntosh (also known as Andy McIntosh) is professor of thermodynamics and combustion theory at the University of Leeds.

    Moreover, classical sequential information, (such as is encoded on DNA), is shown to be a subset of quantum, (i.e. positional), information by the following method.

    In the following 2011 paper, “researchers ,,, show that when the bits (in a computer) to be deleted are quantum-mechanically entangled with the state of an observer, then the observer could even withdraw heat from the system while deleting the bits. Entanglement links the observer’s state to that of the computer in such a way that they know more about the memory than is possible in classical physics.,,, In measuring entropy, one should bear in mind that (in quantum information theory) an object does not have a certain amount of entropy per se, instead an object’s entropy is always dependent on the observer.”

    Quantum knowledge cools computers: New understanding of entropy – June 1, 2011
    Excerpt: Recent research by a team of physicists,,, describe,,, how the deletion of data, under certain conditions, can create a cooling effect instead of generating heat. The cooling effect appears when the strange quantum phenomenon of entanglement is invoked.,,,
    The new study revisits Landauer’s principle for cases when the values of the bits to be deleted may be known. When the memory content is known, it should be possible to delete the bits in such a manner that it is theoretically possible to re-create them. It has previously been shown that such reversible deletion would generate no heat. In the new paper, the researchers go a step further. They show that when the bits to be deleted are quantum-mechanically entangled with the state of an observer, then the observer could even withdraw heat from the system while deleting the bits. Entanglement links the observer’s state to that of the computer in such a way that they know more about the memory than is possible in classical physics.,,,
    In measuring entropy, one should bear in mind that an object does not have a certain amount of entropy per se, instead an object’s entropy is always dependent on the observer. Applied to the example of deleting data, this means that if two individuals delete data in a memory and one has more knowledge of this data, she perceives the memory to have lower entropy and can then delete the memory using less energy.,,,
    No heat, even a cooling effect;
    In the case of perfect classical knowledge of a computer memory (zero entropy), deletion of the data requires in theory no energy at all. The researchers prove that “more than complete knowledge” from quantum entanglement with the memory (negative entropy) leads to deletion of the data being accompanied by removal of heat from the computer and its release as usable energy. This is the physical meaning of negative entropy.
    Renner emphasizes, however, “This doesn’t mean that we can develop a perpetual motion machine.” The data can only be deleted once, so there is no possibility to continue to generate energy. The process also destroys the entanglement, and it would take an input of energy to reset the system to its starting state. The equations are consistent with what’s known as the second law of thermodynamics: the idea that the entropy of the universe can never decrease. Vedral says “We’re working on the edge of the second law. If you go any further, you will break it.”
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/re.....134300.htm

    As well, and as the following 2017 article states: James Clerk Maxwell (said), “The idea of dissipation of energy depends on the extent of our knowledge.”,,,
    quantum information theory,,, describes the spread of information through quantum systems.,,,
    Fifteen years ago, “we thought of entropy as a property of a thermodynamic system,” he said. “Now in (quantum) information theory, we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”,,,

    The Quantum Thermodynamics Revolution – May 2017
    Excerpt: the 19th-century physicist James Clerk Maxwell put it, “The idea of dissipation of energy depends on the extent of our knowledge.”
    In recent years, a revolutionary understanding of thermodynamics has emerged that explains this subjectivity using quantum information theory — “a toddler among physical theories,” as del Rio and co-authors put it, that describes the spread of information through quantum systems. Just as thermodynamics initially grew out of trying to improve steam engines, today’s thermodynamicists are mulling over the workings of quantum machines. Shrinking technology — a single-ion engine and three-atom fridge were both experimentally realized for the first time within the past year — is forcing them to extend thermodynamics to the quantum realm, where notions like temperature and work lose their usual meanings, and the classical laws don’t necessarily apply.
    They’ve found new, quantum versions of the laws that scale up to the originals. Rewriting the theory from the bottom up has led experts to recast its basic concepts in terms of its subjective nature, and to unravel the deep and often surprising relationship between energy and information — the abstract 1s and 0s by which physical states are distinguished and knowledge is measured.,,,
    Renato Renner, a professor at ETH Zurich in Switzerland, described this as a radical shift in perspective. Fifteen years ago, “we thought of entropy as a property of a thermodynamic system,” he said. “Now in (quantum) information theory, we wouldn’t say entropy is a property of a system, but a property of an observer who describes a system.”,,,
    https://www.quantamagazine.org/quantum-thermodynamics-revolution/

    These experiments go to the heart of the Darwinism vs. Intelligent Design debate and completely blow the reductive materialistic presuppositions of Darwinists, (presuppositions about immaterial information being merely ’emergent’ from some material basis), out of the water.

    In other words, directly contrary to Darwinian presuppositions, immaterial information, particularly ‘positional quantum information’, is now experimentally shown to be its own distinct physical entity that is a product of an ‘observer who describes the system’. And although it can interact with matter and energy, (interact in a ‘top-down’ manner; see George Ellis ‘Recognizing Top Down Causation’), it is still shown to be its own independent entity that is separate from matter and energy and that has a quote unquote ‘thermodynamic content’ that can be physically measured.

    In other words, Intelligent Design, and a semi-direct inference to Intelligence that is necessary in order to explain why life is so far out of thermodynamic equilibrium, has, for all intents and purposes, achieved experimental confirmation via these recent experimental realizations of the Maxwell demon thought experiment.

  11. 11
    bornagain77 says:

    Just how much information is required to be imparted into ‘nature’, via an Intelligence, in order to explain a living cell is touched upon in the following article.

    The information content that is found to be in a simple one cell bacterium, when working from the thermodynamic perspective, is found to be around 10 to the 12 bits,,,

    Biophysics – Information theory. Relation between information and entropy: – Setlow-Pollard, Ed. Addison Wesley
    Excerpt: Linschitz gave the figure 9.3 x 10^12 cal/deg or 9.3 x 10^12 x 4.2 joules/deg for the entropy of a bacterial cell. Using the relation H = S/(k In 2), we find that the information content is 4 x 10^12 bits. Morowitz’ deduction from the work of Bayne-Jones and Rhees gives the lower value of 5.6 x 10^11 bits, which is still in the neighborhood of 10^12 bits. Thus two quite different approaches give rather concordant figures.
    http://www.astroscu.unam.mx/~a.....ecular.htm

    ,,, Which is the equivalent of about 100 million pages of Encyclopedia Britannica. ‘In comparison,,, the largest libraries in the world,, have about 10 million volumes or 10^12 bits.”

    “a one-celled bacterium, e. coli, is estimated to contain the equivalent of 100 million pages of Encyclopedia Britannica. Expressed in information in science jargon, this would be the same as 10^12 bits of information. In comparison, the total writings from classical Greek Civilization is only 10^9 bits, and the largest libraries in the world – The British Museum, Oxford Bodleian Library, New York Public Library, Harvard Widenier Library, and the Moscow Lenin Library – have about 10 million volumes or 10^12 bits.”
    – R. C. Wysong – The Creation-evolution Controversy

    ‘The information content of a simple cell has been estimated as around 10^12 bits, comparable to about a hundred million pages of the Encyclopedia Britannica.”
    Carl Sagan, “Life” in Encyclopedia Britannica: Macropaedia (1974 ed.), pp. 893-894

    Thus since Bacterial cells are about 10 times smaller than most plant and animal cells.

    Size Comparisons of Bacteria, Amoeba, Animal & Plant Cells
    Excerpt: Bacterial cells are very small – about 10 times smaller than most plant and animal cells.
    https://education.seattlepi.com/size-comparisons-bacteria-amoeba-animal-plant-cells-4966.html

    And since there are conservatively estimated to be around 30 trillion cells within the average human body,

    Revised Estimates for the Number of Human and Bacteria Cells in the Body – 2016
    Abstract: Reported values in the literature on the number of cells in the body differ by orders of magnitude and are very seldom supported by any measurements or calculations. Here, we integrate the most up-to-date information on the number of human and bacterial cells in the body. We estimate the total number of bacteria in the 70 kg “reference man” to be 3.8·10^13. For human cells, we identify the dominant role of the hematopoietic lineage to the total count (?90%) and revise past estimates to 3.0·10^13 human cells. Our analysis also updates the widely-cited 10:1 ratio, showing that the number of bacteria in the body is actually of the same order as the number of human cells, and their total mass is about 0.2 kg.
    https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002533

    Then that gives us a rough ballpark estimate of around 300 trillion times 100 million pages of Encyclopedia Britannica. Or about 300 trillion times the information content contained within all the books contained in all the largest libraries in the world.

    Needless to say, that is a massive amount of immaterial information that is present within our physical bodies.

    As the following article states, the information to build a human infant, atom by atom, would take up the equivalent of enough thumb drives to fill the Titanic, multiplied by 2,000.

    In a TED Talk, (the Question You May Not Ask,,, Where did the information come from?) – November 29, 2017
    Excerpt: Sabatini is charming.,,, he deploys some memorable images. He points out that the information to build a human infant, atom by atom, would take up the equivalent of enough thumb drives to fill the Titanic, multiplied by 2,000. Later he wheels out the entire genome, in printed form, of a human being,,,,:
    [F]or the first time in history, this is the genome of a specific human, printed page-by-page, letter-by-letter: 262,000 pages of information, 450 kilograms.,,,
    https://evolutionnews.org/2017/11/in-a-ted-talk-heres-the-question-you-may-not-ask/

    As should be obvious to even the most metaphysically blinded Darwinist, it is impossible for the sequential information on DNA to account for this massive amount of ‘positional information’ that is somehow coming into a developing embryo and building ‘a human infant, atom by atom’.

    As Doug Axe states in the following video, “there are a quadrillion neural connections in the human brain, that’s vastly more neural connections in the human brain than there are bits (of information) in the human genome. So,,, there’s got to be something else going on that makes us what we are.”

    “There is also a presumption, typically when we talk about our genome, (that the genome) is a blueprint for making us. And that is actually not a proven fact in biology. That is an assumption. And (one) that I question because I don’t think that 4 billion bases, which would be 8 billion bits of information, that you would actually have enough information to specify a human being. If you consider for example that there are a quadrillion neural connections in the human brain, that’s vastly more neural connections in the human brain than there are bits (of information) in the human genome. So,,, there’s got to be something else going on that makes us what we are.”
    Doug Axe – Intelligent Design 3.0 – Stephen C. Meyer – video (1 hour 16 minute mark)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvwBaD8-00w&t=4575s

    And at about the 41:00 minute mark of the following video, Dr. Jonathan Wells, (who specializes in embryology), using a branch of mathematics called category theory, demonstrates that, during embryological development, ‘positional information’ must somehow be coming into the developing embryo, ‘from the outside’, by some ‘non-material’ method, in order to explain the transdifferentiation of cells into their multiple different states during embryological development.

    Design Beyond DNA: A Conversation with Dr. Jonathan Wells – video (41:00 minute mark) – January 2017
    https://youtu.be/ASAaANVBoiE?t=2484

    As well, the preceding finding that information must be coming into a developing embryo for the ‘outside’, fits, hand in glove, with William Dembski’s and Robert Marks’ previous work establishing the principle of ‘conservation of information’

    “Information does not magically materialize. It can be created by intelligence or it can be shunted around by natural forces. But natural forces, and Darwinian processes in particular, do not create information.”
    – William Dembski
    https://books.google.com/books?id=pe5nAwAAQBAJ&pg=PT408

  12. 12
    bornagain77 says:

    In order to establish that the Intelligent Designer who created, and sustains, life must be God, it is first necessary to point out that “quantum information” is now found to be ubiquitous within life:

    “What happens is this classical information (of DNA) is embedded, sandwiched, into the quantum information (of DNA). And most likely this classical information is never accessed because it is inside all the quantum information. You can only access the quantum information or the electron clouds and the protons. So mathematically you can describe that as a quantum/classical state.”
    Elisabeth Rieper – Classical and Quantum Information in DNA – video (Longitudinal Quantum Information resides along the entire length of DNA discussed at the 19:30 minute mark; at 24:00 minute mark Dr Rieper remarks that practically the whole DNA molecule can be viewed as quantum information with classical information embedded within it)
    https://youtu.be/2nqHOnVTxJE?t=1176

    Quantum criticality in a wide range of important biomolecules – Mar. 6, 2015
    Excerpt: “Most of the molecules taking part actively in biochemical processes are tuned exactly to the transition point and are critical conductors,” they say.
    That’s a discovery that is as important as it is unexpected. “These findings suggest an entirely new and universal mechanism of conductance in biology very different from the one used in electrical circuits.”
    The permutations of possible energy levels of biomolecules is huge so the possibility of finding even one (biomolecule) that is in the quantum critical state by accident is mind-bogglingly small and, to all intents and purposes, impossible.,, of the order of 10^-50 of possible small biomolecules and even less for proteins,”,,,
    “what exactly is the advantage that criticality confers?”
    https://medium.com/the-physics-arxiv-blog/the-origin-of-life-and-the-hidden-role-of-quantum-criticality-ca4707924552

    Darwinian Materialism vs. Quantum Biology – Part II – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oSig2CsjKbg

    What is interesting about finding quantum information to be ubiquitous within life (and finding sequential information to be a subset of quantum information), is that quantum correlations are a ‘non-local’, i.e. beyond space and time, affair that requires a beyond space and time cause in order to explain its effect.

    As the following paper entitled “Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory” stated, “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,”

    Looking beyond space and time to cope with quantum theory – 29 October 2012
    Excerpt: “Our result gives weight to the idea that quantum correlations somehow arise from outside spacetime, in the sense that no story in space and time can describe them,”
    http://www.quantumlah.org/high.....uences.php

    As well, it is also important to realize that quantum information, unlike classical sequential information, is ‘physically’ conserved. As the following article states, In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed.

    Quantum no-hiding theorem experimentally confirmed for first time – 2011
    Excerpt: In the classical world, information can be copied and deleted at will. In the quantum world, however, the conservation of quantum information means that information cannot be created nor destroyed. This concept stems from two fundamental theorems of quantum mechanics: the no-cloning theorem and the no-deleting theorem. A third and related theorem, called the no-hiding theorem, addresses information loss in the quantum world. According to the no-hiding theorem, if information is missing from one system (which may happen when the system interacts with the environment), then the information is simply residing somewhere else in the Universe; in other words, the missing information cannot be hidden in the correlations between a system and its environment.
    http://www.physorg.com/news/20.....tally.html

    The implication of finding ‘non-local’, beyond space and time, and ‘conserved’, quantum information in molecular biology on such a massive scale, in every important biomolecule in our bodies, is fairly, and pleasantly, obvious.
    That pleasant implication, of course, being the fact that we now have very strong empirical evidence suggesting that we do indeed have an eternal soul that is capable of living beyond the death of our material bodies. As Stuart Hameroff states in the following article, the quantum information,,, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed.,,, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”

    Leading Scientists Say Consciousness Cannot Die It Goes Back To The Universe – Oct. 19, 2017 – Spiritual
    Excerpt: “Let’s say the heart stops beating. The blood stops flowing. The microtubules lose their quantum state. But the quantum information, which is in the microtubules, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed. It just distributes and dissipates to the universe at large. If a patient is resuscitated, revived, this quantum information can go back into the microtubules and the patient says, “I had a near death experience. I saw a white light. I saw a tunnel. I saw my dead relatives.,,” Now if they’re not revived and the patient dies, then it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”
    – Stuart Hameroff – Quantum Entangled Consciousness – Life After Death – video (5:00 minute mark)
    https://radaronline.com/exclusives/2012/10/life-after-death-soul-science-morgan-freeman/

    I have a question for ‘Professor Dave’ who so condescendingly mocked Dr. Tour’s Christianity,

    Mark 8:37
    Is anything worth more than your soul?

    It is also very interesting to note how all of the preceding evidence fits, hand and glove, with John 1:1-4 in the New Testament:

    John 1:1-4
    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind.

    That John 1:1-4 should fit, hand and glove, with what was only recently discovered via our most advanced science, (i.e. via our advances in quantum information theory and quantum biology), is nothing short of completely amazing.

    To further drive the point home I offer this following quote,

    “The most fundamental definition of reality is not matter or energy, but information–and it is the processing of information that lies at the root of all physical, biological, economic, and social phenomena.”
    Vlatko Vedral – Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford, and CQT (Centre for Quantum Technologies) at the National University of Singapore, and a Fellow of Wolfson College – a recognized leader in the field of quantum mechanics.

    In a world where Christianity would be given a fair hearing from most scientists, since Christianity did indeed give us modern science in the first place, (instead of Christianity being unfairly dismissed out of hand as supposedly being ‘unscientific’ as ‘Professor Dave’ did in his mocking of Dr. Tour’s belief in Christ), this ‘prediction’ of John 1:1-4 about ‘information’ being foundational to life should count as a rather dramatic ‘scientific’ confirmation for the truth of Christianity.

    Namely that only Jesus, as demonstrated by His resurrection from the dead by God the Father, truly has life, (and more particularly the gift of ‘eternal life’), contained within Himself.

    John 3:16
    For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

    Supplemental note:

    January 2021
    Whereas atheists have no observational evidence that the Multiverses that they postulated to ‘explain. away’ the fine tuning of the universe are real, (nor do Atheists have any evidence that the ‘parallel universes’ that they postulated to ‘explain away’ quantum wave collapse are real), Christians, on the other hand, can appeal directly to Special Relativity, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, (i.e. our most precisely tested theories ever in the history of science), to support their belief that God really does uphold this universe in its continual existence, as well as to support their belief in the reality of a heavenly dimension and in a hellish dimension.”
    https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/closer-to-truth-are-there-really-extra-dimensions/#comment-722947

  13. 13
    bornagain77 says:

    The next lecture by Dr. Tour starts in 50 minutes

    Episode 1/13: Introduction to Abiogenesis // A Course on Abiogenesis by Dr. James Tour
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NqoVxwdWWpg

Leave a Reply