Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Is There ‘Consilience’ With What Is Shown by Malaria?

In Previous Posts I have provided a short summary of what is contained in Prof. Behe's book entitled 'The Edge of Evolution'. The summary shows that when there is a full cell with a nucleus with complex divisions (called a eukaryotic cell) like malaria, it is difficult to make substantial changes to what the proteins of the cell do. One study relied upon Prof. Behe shows that the change rate is so slim that to even make a beneficial two-point amino acid change (i.e., where two amino acids in a protein are changed), such a mutation causes malaria to develop resistance to the best developed drug used in fighting malaria, Chloroquine. The long but not impossible odds were calculated by this published study as being 1 in 10²⁰ every time when malaria mutates. So although it is extremely unlikely for malaria to develop a resistance to Chloroquine, when it does it has disastrous consequences. A mosquito can pass along the Chloroquine resistance to an entire community, and the result is that there is Chloroquine resistance in an entire village/town. This leads to increased deaths and malaria at least temporarily, winning the battle against man. But an interesting point is that the Malarial parasite has an Achilles' heel: it won't develop in its mosquito host unless the temperatures are balmy, restricting it mainly to the tropics. And so we see that evolution has limits: it does not develop new abilities in a cell, like the ability to travel to more temperate climates (like the northern hemisphere). Malaria remains only in tropical climates where it is a fantastic killer of people. Here, evolution/ Darwinism is no help for malaria to become a truly global killer, thank God.


 

But Prof. Behe also has a chapter (chapter 10) describing 'Consilience'. I thought it was a cool term, so I thought I would share it with y'all. Consilience is defined by Prof. Behe as an old-fashioned synonym for concurrence. And he further describes this as when separate scientific disciplines all point in the same direction, there is a 'Consilience', and we can be more confident of the conclusion. He claims there is a Consilience of various branches of the physical sciences – physics, astronomy, chemistry, geology, molecular biology – all of which point to a purposeful design in the universe. These sciences reflect a vivid picture of a universe in which design extends from the very foundations of nature to all parts of life.


 

There are many examples of this discussed by Prof. Behe, the fine-tuning of the laws of physics, the molecules of life have useful properties to allow life on earth (like water molecules, for example), and the rarity of planets like we have on earth. All of the laws of science, finely tuned properties, details and events of the universe all point to our universe having been designed for life. Although Prof. Behe states that "Design isn't the only option", the evidence he provides certainly leads to that conclusion.


 

I will add as part of the Consilience the origin of life (OOL). There is a lot that can be said about the impossibility of life developing from non-living matter. But for now let me provide a link to an animation video of what is contained in a cell: http://aimediaserver4.com/studiodaily/videoplayer/?src=ai4/harvard/harvard.swf&width=640&height=520. Here is an example of why a cell is like a miniaturized factory:


 

  • a cell membrane with a particular, important shape;
  • inside the cell, is cytoplasm and a nucleus;;
  • every new cell is alive. They have a lifespan where they live, reproduce through cell division, and they die;
  • the cytoplasm is amazing: one cell has hundreds or even thousands of power plants (called mitochondria) that converts the chemical energy of food into a form of energy the cell can use to grow, divide and do its work;
  • the cytoplasm also have little sacs connected by membranes that act as the highways of the cell. These sacs and membranes channel the proteins throughout the cell.; (later addition, called Endoplasmic reticulum?)
  • also in the cytoplasm is the Golgi apparatus, which is the processing plant of the cell. The Golgi apparatus processes mostly the proteins in the cell. Some of the proteins are stored in small spheres, while others are transported to the cell membrane to transport to other cells;
  • also in the cytoplasm is the garbage plant (called lysosomes) that breaks down many substances. For example, in a white blood cell, the lysosomes break down harmful bacteria;
  • and you think that's complicated!, there is still more in the cytoplasm: for example, there is cytoskeleton of several types of protein rods that my encyclopedia says forms "complicated network", that forms the shape of the cell. On the outside of the structure is cilia/flagellum that contains the bundle of cytoskeleton rods that extend out of the cell, that allow the cell to swim;


 

It sounds like a little factory, doesn't it? It looks like someone has designed this cell. But the amazing nature of one single cell is just the beginning. Let's take a look at the cell's nucleus:


 

- the nucleus is the headquarters of the cell. It directs the activities of the cell.

- in the nucleus is the incredible chromosome – Human cells each have 46 chromosomes. Chromosomes are the carriers of inheritance. This is done through Genes, which are part of the DNA molecule. That was an interesting fact to me where the DNA is a single molecule. Genes control the passing on of traits from the parent cell to the offspring. Genes, of course, determines that a dog gives birth to a dog, and not a cat. The genes also determine blood type, color of eyes, and thousands of other characteristics. All inside the nucleus of one little cell.


 

- So DNA is part of the chromosome. As you know, DNA is where so much of scientific research is taking place. Breaking down the sequence of DNA. But DNA is just one molecule, made up of millions of atoms. And the grouping of chemicals in the DNA and its order is unique for each living creature.


 

- DNA's main work is to direct the production of "complicated" proteins. Most of the cell's structures are built of these proteins.


 

- proteins are the most abundant macromolecules in living cells. Proteins are made up of long chains (called polypeptides). And these chains are made up of small molecules called amino acids. 20 amino acids are found in proteins and the sequence is all important. Mndnfkfkewnhbfnmfmwekfkewlfkefkewlflwldelw. Did you like my illustration? Random assembly of the amino acids creates junk. Only by having the correct sequence of amino acids are the proteins made useful Just like with letters in the English language, the letters only make sense when they are put in the right order. Looks like another example of someOne's design of the cell, where proteins are brought together and made into something specific for use in the cell, right?


 


 

Bill Gates commented on the obvious: "DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software we've ever created." Now Chuck Colson had an interesting comment about DNA in his How Now Shall We Live book (p. 75), where he notes: It's true that DNA is composed of ordinary chemicals (bases, sugars, phosphates) that react according to ordinary laws. But what makes DNA function as a message is not the chemicals themselves but rather their sequence, their pattern. The chemicals in DNA are grouped into molecules (called nucleotides) that act like letters in a message, and they must be in a particular order if the message is going to be intelligible…


 

Thanks. Let me know if you have any thoughts about this.

Friday, November 23, 2007

The Good News

When asked what will happen after they die, most people say that they will go to heaven. And if asked why should they go to heaven, again most people say that they are good people, and that good people go to heaven. In this post, I will see if this makes sense.


 

The great evangelist Billy Graham has done an amazing job helping people to see that they are sinners who don't deserve heaven, but that they are sinners who deserve punishment. But I wanted to take a slightly different look at the Good News. A look at whether any "good people" could be in the presence of God in heaven.


 

A primary characteristic of God is that He is holy. And a constant theme throughout the Bible is that because God is holy, we should also be holy. See, Leviticus 19:2, 21:6, Matthew 5:48, 1 Peter 1:15. But another aspect of God's holiness, is that because He is holy, He is unapproachable in His majesty. We see this in the Garden of Eden, after Adam ate the forbidden apple, Adam could no longer be in God's presence, and had to hide (Genesis 3:8). The great Prophet Isaiah saw God's Throne room in heaven, with God's magnificence filling the room with His robe, and seraphim flying in the room crying out


 

Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts; the whole earth is full of His glory! (Isaiah 6:3)


 

And the Prophet's immediate reaction seeing the brilliance of this vision was sensing his unworthiness. He cried out his unworthiness, his uncleanliness before God's holiness. He said: "Woe is me! For I am lost!" (Isaiah 6:5). And only with his sin atoned for and guilt being taken away by the seraphim's touch of a burning coal to his lips could he stand even the visionary presence of God.


 

So how could any one of us think we are worthy to one day stand and be with God in heaven? His holiness is overpowering and we are only imperfect people. He is the Creator, and we are the created. As Revelation 21:27 makes clear: Nothing unclean will ever enter God's presence in the New Jerusalem, nor anyone who has done what is detestable, or false. That is all of us, and so, without something more, we could never be in the presence of anything so holy. His being nice, or good, isn't enough to allow us to bridge this holiness gap. We are mere mortals covered with a lifetime of the mud of sinning. God is the perfect, unstained Creator of the universe. How could the two ever be together?


 

Let me emphasize this point just a little further. God's Word makes clear that the following people will not enter heaven. Let's see if you or I will be disqualified because we have done any of the following:

the cowardly;

the faithless;

the detestable;

murderers;

the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars (Rev. 21:8);

all unrighteousness, sexual immorality, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness, envy, murder, strife, deceit, evil-mindedness, along with those who are backbiters, haters of God, violent, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, undiscerning, untrustworthy, unforgiving, and the unmerciful. Also deserving of death are those who approve of others acting in such a way. (Romans 1:28-32).

If you haven't seen your sin yet as making you incapable of entering heaven yet, perhaps the following will help you - those who are unrighteous, fornicators [meaning sex between two people who are not married], nor idolators, adulterers, homosexuals, sodomites, thieves, covetous, drunkards, revilers, nor extortioners. 1 Cor. 6:9-10. In addition, those who practice uncleanness, lewdness, sorcery, hatred, contentious, jealousy, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambition, dissension, heresy, envy, murder, drunkenness, revelry and the like. (Gal. 5:19-:21).


 

Whew, that is quite of list of people who deserve death, and not worthy of entering heaven. It is all of us, including me. Oh yes, I forget that the name of this post is the good news! So where is the good news? If you see yourself as someone who is not worthy of being with God, not able by your own effort as being in heaven, and as we started out this post, if you are not a good person entitled to go to heaven, then you may be one that God's Grace will save. For it is by God's grace through faith that you are saved. And this is not from yourselves, but it is the gift of God. Not by works, so that no one can boast. (Eph. 2:8-9).


 

Yes, only by the atoning sacrifice on the Cross by Jesus Christ, exchanging our sin for Jesus' righteousness on the Cross is anyone saved, and can enter God's presence in heaven. This is the really Good News that saves. Praise be to God and God alone! So the Good News is that God came in the form of a baby, not to condemn the world of its sins, it is already condemned. Instead, Jesus was sent to rescue the world from its sins, and this gift is available to everyone who repents of living without God in their life, and willing to make Jesus their Lord and Savior. Thank you for letting me share the Good News this Christmas season.

Tuesday, November 20, 2007

What are the Implications of the Evolution of Malaria/HIV

What are the implications of what I previously described in man’s battle against malaria and HIV? In both malaria and HIV (Prof. Behe also examines e-coli) we see that evolution does assist a cell in fighting off man-made drugs. Evolution helps by making one or two point changes in an amino acid sequence (amino acids make up the proteins who are the workers in a cell). But from this great sample of evidence, we see that evolution does NOT make new machinery in a cell, and does not make anything new.

So what is the conclusion that we can draw as to Darwinism’s claim that beneficial small changes over time (random mutation/variation) will succeed in future generations and be added to through natural selection (the short formula used is RM + NS = Evolution). The claim is that through successive generations these small changes will result in greater changes, ultimately resulting in all that is contained within humans beings.

But does this make sense? I don’t think it does. Darwinists claim that everything starts from what was contained on early Earth: rock, water and sunshine, all of which are dead, non-living materials. So how do we get living cells from non-living things like rock and water? The Darwinists claim is that by adding something like electricity a real life “Frankenstein” can be made to come to life. I hope to discuss this more in future posts. But for now, let me say that it is FOOLISH to believe that intelligence (specifically human intelligence) can come from non-life. Not even today’s best of Designers can accomplish this, and it is foolish on its face to believe this happened through random forces in Earth’s past.

And the great benefit of Prof. Behe’s ‘Edge of Evolution’ is that it shows what are the limits of Random Mutation. So besides common sense/reason telling us we are the result of a Designed, we also see that the scientific evidence clearly shows that Darwinism cannot make progressively more complex living things. The evidence shows that larger beaks can be developed in a Galapagos finch. The evidence also shows that malaria or HIV can defeat most drugs used to fight it, through the small changes to a protein’s amino acid sequence. But that’s it – Darwinism cannot create anything as complex as a brain, a central nervous system, or sexual organs. Again, the answer seems too obvious to dwell upon.

And added to this is that the math does not add up for Darwinists. When we see 1 trillion malaria cells in an infected person, and 500 million people infected each year, we see an enormous amount of living cells going through the process of Darwinism. The number of malaria cells produced in a single year is roughly equal to 100 times the number of all the mammals that have ever lived on Earth (!!!). Let me say this again – All of the mammals that have lived on Earth does not equal even 1% of a single year’s production of malaria cells. And so, if we are going to see evolution do something before our eyes, it would be done in the cells of malaria or HIV or E-Coli. But Darwinism has done nothing.

So could we see the large diversity of mammals (I believe I read that there are 5,300 different mammal species) being created over the last 200 million years? No, of course not – think about the math: If malaria has had a two point change in its amino acid sequence to fight off the drug Chloroquine only 10 times over the past 50 years, what are the odds of any single mammal developing anything greater than a 2 point change? Science teaches us that it can’t happen.

So my conclusion is that the Darwininian process of Random Mutation/Variation is only a minor process. It is helpful in fighting off manmade drugs that are attacking it. But evolution is not a Creator, it cannot develop brains, a circulatory system, or anything this complex. And so, if life’s complexity is beyond the Edge of Evolution, this means that some sort of Designer was involved. And the Designer is not unknown to us here living in the 21st century: He is the triune God of the Bible. As Genesis 1:1 says – In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Is the Evolution of HIV different from Malaria?

In my last post, I provided a brief description of the battle between man and malaria. Malaria is the best studied example of evolution for a simple reason: numbers. With so many people infected and up to 1 trillion malaria cells in an infected person, science has learned much about fighting malaria. But malaria is still winning the battle, still killing 1 million people each year. And the best drug that has been developed is Chloroquine. But malaria has found a way to counter even Chloroquine – with the odds of developing resistance to Chloroquine roughly one in a hundred billion billion. Written in shorthand this is 1 in 10²⁰. But perhaps the study of HIV has revealed something more or different.

HIV is a virus attacking cells of a person’s immune system, while the P. falciparum / malaria is a eukaryotic cell, which typically has a cell nucleus with DNA in the nucleus. With HIV being the simplest form of life, a virus, this means that it is much less complicated than the malaria cell. While malaria has thousands of genes, HIV has only 9 genes, and only 1/1000th of the DNA information. But HIV is a mutational freak: it has a mutation rate 10,000 times faster than malaria. This is an enormous tragedy throughout the world where millions have been killed by it. So does the simplicity of HIV (being only a virus) along with a very high mutation rate mean that evolution will work more powerfully in HIV? Again, as with malaria the answer is a clear: NO.

So what do we see from the large amounts of scientific research spent on studying HIV? Yes, because of the high mutation rate, it is even more able to resist the drugs used against it. This is why a drug cocktail is used to fight HIV – so as to raise the chance against HIV’s high mutation rate. But this is similar to what scientists discovered in their research about malaria. But otherwise, HIV is “a complete stick-in-the-mud”, the only changes are “biochemically trivial”. There have been no biochemical changes in the virus at all.

While HIV has huge population numbers and intense selective pressure (because of man’s use of drugs against it), evolution works in single and double (and because of the high mutation rate, even more) point mutations, but there are no new useful protein-protein interactions,, and no new molecular machines. HIV has not discovered a way to enter different kinds of cells, beside the immune cells it attacks. It has not developed any new way to interact with other proteins, and nothing has happened at the molecular level: no new machinery, no new gene duplications that could lead to a new function. BOTTOM LINE: While Darwinists loudly celebrate studies of finch beaks, showing the most modest of changes over time as the finches’ food supply changes. But here we have genetic studies over thousands upon thousands of generations, of trillions upon trillions of organisms, with nothing of biochemical significance being shown.

Again, I am using Prof. Michael Behe’s Edge of Evolution book as my source. Next time, I will try and draw some conclusions and tie together what this impressive amount of scientific evidence shows.

Friday, November 9, 2007

What Can Evolution Do?

Malaria is the million person Murderer; it kills 1 million people each year, and makes 100 million other people sick. In some regions, it kills half of all children before the reach the age of 5. It is like Dracula, feeding on blood. It is carried by mosquitoes, and transmitted when they bite. Once inside a person they keep feeding until they reach the liver, where they stop to multiply. It attaches to a red blood cell, goes inside puts a protective covering on and feeds on the hemoglobin. The infected blood cell gets stuck in our veins and stops circulating. Malaria reproduces until about 20 copies are made, they then break out of the now trashed red blood cell and re-enter the bloodstream to go into more red blood cells. They multiply exponentially, so that within a few days there are a trillion new malarial parasites, which consume a large portion of the victim’s blood. Because they are so numerous, and it has been studied so much, it is the best example of what evolution can do.

The modern fight against malaria began in South America with the discovery that bark from the cinchona tree was useful for treating the fever. Quinine is developed from the cinchona bark, and once it was discovered in the 17th century that it could be used as a cure for malaria. But in the 1940’s the active ingredient was isolated, and a compound developed called ‘Chloroquine’ that was even more effective against malaria. Because Chloroquine was effective, with few side effects and inexpensive to make it became the drug of choice for treatment of malaria for decades.

Malaria has 14 chromosomes, and the resistance part was recently discovered to be part of a 400,000 nucleotide region of one chromosome. It was further narrowed to 36,000 nucleotide region. The complexity of even a simple parasite like malaria is mind-blowing. The DNA for malaria encodes 5,300 proteins (proteins are essential to the operation of the cell, participating in every process of the cell. This includes being enzymes for metabolism, structural and mechanical functions – like forming the cell structure and building muscles, cell-signaling, immune responses and cell adhesion.) The PfCRT protein (for P. falciparum, a malaria species - Throughout my post when I use ‘malaria’, it is for P. falciparum) normally has 424 amino acids in a strict sequence. When there is a change in the amino acid sequence, the change commonly happens at position number 76 and 220. These mutations are what have provided malaria’s resistance to Chloroquine. This is what evolution can do in making an organism more resistant to an enemy like Chloroquine that is designed to destroy malaria.
So these two mutations at spot 76 and 220 of the amino acid sequence are what Darwinism can do – they provide resistance to the primary drug used to fight malaria; Chloroquine. Remember, that there are 1 trillion malaria cells in an infected person. And there are over 500 million people infected each year. Tom’s Important Point: So with so many malaria cells (1 trillion in a sick person) and so many people infected with malaria (500 million each year), how often does a simple double mutation of the amino acid sequence happen to provide resistance to the top drug used to fight Chloroquine? One researcher has estimated that it has only happened 10 times over the past 50 years.

Resistance to Chloroquine has only appeared 10 times in the whole world in the past 50 years (!!!). And so, one writer estimates that if you count the number of malaria cells in a very sick person times the number of people who get malaria each year times the number of years since Chloroquine was introduced, we see that the odds of a parasite developing resistance to Chloroquine is roughly one in a hundred billion billion. Written in shorthand this is 1 in 10²⁰. Most of the information in this post is from Prof. Michael Behe’s recent book: The Edge of Evolution. My background is not in science, and so if you find anything that needs to be corrected, please be gentle. Your first course in molecular biology is now concluded.

Thursday, November 1, 2007

Does God Still Do Miracles?

Does God Still Perform Miracles, Signs and Wonders?

I am (my health permitting) attending an Alpha retreat this weekend. And part of the Alpha program is praying for each other, asking God to provide miraculous answers to these prayers, and to give different gifts to the Alpha guests (See, 1 Corinthians 12). But a fair question is whether or not God still performs miracles. We don’t see people walking on water, or splitting the Red Sea anymore, and so is it possible that God no longer performs miracles?

I believe God still provides miraculous answers to prayer. But the starting point in looking at this question is that God authenticated Jesus’ message and ministry as well as the ministry of the Apostles. Mark 16:20 and Hebrews 2:4. Hebrews 2:4 is very instructive, where teaches that the great message of salvation (by God’s grace alone through faith in Jesus alone) was first proclaimed by Jesus, and that God Himself bore witness to the truth of this salvation: while God also bore witness by signs and wonders and various miracles and by jgifts of the Holy Spirit distributed according to his will.

And so God was a witness to Jesus’ message through miracles, signs and wonders, and the giving of spiritual gifts, including the gift of tongues. Miracles and wonders and the giving of gifts was God’s testimony to the truthfulness of Jesus.

But did miraculous gifts, signs and wonders stop after the New Testament writings were completed? This would mean that God relies solely on the writings and message of the New Testament for people to provide salvation for the unbelievers. But this means God has given up helping people through miraculous answers to prayers and giving of gifts.
But here is why I believe that God still provides miraculous answers to prayers. One of the earliest names for God is El Roi (Genesis 16:13), which means God who Sees and Cares’. And so, if we trust the Bible in saying that God is almighty (Genesis 49:25) and Sovereign. It is good to remember that God is sovereign in that He has control over all circumstances. He has total authority.

So we see that El Roi, God is a God who cares for us, and because He is sovereign, He also has the power to miraculously change circumstances. The examples of this throughout the Bible are too numerous to mention. But here’s a couple of quick examples: Jesus feeding thousands; Jesus healing the man by the pool; “many signs and wonders were regularly done among the people by the hands of the apostles.” (Acts 5:12).So God has the power and the love for us to care for what is happening in our lives, and to miraculously help us. And we see in Malachi 3:6 that God’s character is such that He does not change. And so, if He did miracles in the Old Testament (including Creation, the flood, Sodom and Gomorrah, Elijah and Elisha, etc.) and well as throughout the New Testament, then God’s unchanging nature means that He will do miracles today. And I have seen enough miraculous answers to prayer to believe this. God is powerful, He loves us, He wants to help us, and so there are times when God will use miracles to show His love and concern for us. Praise God, El Roi!