Origin of life challenge: The information challenge is the only one that counts
|December 24, 2017||Posted by News under Information, Origin Of Life|
From Brian Miller at Evolution News & Views:
The first issue relates to the comparison of the sequencing of amino acids in proteins to the letters in a sentence. This analogy is generally disliked by design critics since it so clearly reveals the powerful evidence for intelligence from the information contained in life. It also helps lay audiences see past the technobabble and misdirection often used to mislead the public, albeit unintentionally.
The challenge for nucleotide based enzymes (ribozymes) is equally daunting. Stumbling across a random sequence that could perform even one of the most basic reactions also requires a search library in the trillions. So, any multistage process would also be beyond the reach of chance. A glimmer of hope was offered by Jack Szostak when he published a paper that purported to show RNA could self-replicate without the aid of any enzyme. Unaided self-repliation would have greatly aided the search process. However, he later retracted the paper after the results could not be reproduced.
Naturalists are compelled to believe something preposterous about the world we can see all around us – that it arose purely by chance. They are not free to have an alternative perspective any more than Bret Weinstein was free to just teach science or Lindsay Shepherd was free to just teach communication arts. They worship a jealous fraud.
The skeptic could always argue that some materialistic explanation might eventually be found to explain those patterns, so design cannot be proven. Yet, the identification of design is still eminently reasonable. The evidence for design in the simplest cell is unambiguous since it contains energy conversion technology, advanced information processing, and automated assembly of all of its components, to name just a few features. The real issue is not the evidence but whether people’s philosophical assumptions would allow them to deny the preposterous and embrace the obvious. More.
Unless you want to hear the hypothesis of the week for the rest of your life. There is, one supposes, a market for that…
See also: Can the rot of naturalism be stopped? Relating information to matter and energy might help
What we know and don’t know about the origin of life