Has Science Disproven God?

Reasonable Faith UTDJan 31, 2013

Allen Hwww.OriginsDiscussion.info

Awareness Topic:Modern-Day Slavery

If you want to help fight slavery:See enditMovement.comGet involved in International Justice Mission

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2013/01/04/pkg-clancy-passion-2013.cnn#/video/us/2013/01/04/pkg-clancy-passion-2013.cnn

2

Has Science Disproven God?

• Science is not in business of proving things• Science studies the natural world

– God, if he exists, is beyond nature– Methodological Naturalism limits science to

searching for natural causes• Leads to a blind spot

– Cannot distinguish between a research problem and a paradigm problem

• Does science intersect with religion at all?

Intersection of Science and Christianity

• Science could show problems with certain interpretations of Scripture– Our ability to interpret the Bible and the natural world is imperfect

• Some occasional tension is expected– If unambiguous clear scientific error in Bible, at most that would

pose a problem for inerrancy• At most science could indicate a lack of evidence for God

from the natural world– God could have chosen solely to use philosophical arguments,

historical evidence, religious experience– Science doesn’t say anything, scientists do

• Implications beyond science domain is highly subjective

is MinimalScience Chr.

Genesis may not be teaching a young earth

– Hebrew word for day (yom) can also literally mean long time periods• “Day of Lord” represents long period of time in other verses

– Hebrews 4 indicates God still in the seventh day of rest– Other verses suggest long time period

• I Chronicles 16:15, Deut 7:9, Psa 105:8 refer to 1000 generations – Genesis account itself points to this interpretation

• Gen 2:4 “This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made earth and heaven“

– Many Biblical scholars hold to inerrancy and old ages• Norm Geisler, Lee Strobel, Chip Ingram, John Piper

– Not just a reaction to modern scientific theories• Interpretation of many early rabbis and church fathers

– Philo, Irenaeus, Origen, Basil, Augustine» Representing 1st through 5th century

5

What about Conflicts between Science and Naturalism?

Origins Issue

Science Naturalistic Response

Universe Universe not eternal (BVG + 2nd Law)- Includes time and space

Maybe something can come from nothing after all?(But nothing != Quantum vacuum)

Initial conditions of universe

Chances universe’s initial conditions would support life(1 in 1010123)

Atheist Sean Carroll: Why would God have finely-tuned the universe so beyond what is necessary?(To leave evidence of creation)

Fine-tuning of laws and constants

Miniscule changes to each of 4 fundamental forces or certain particle masses or other constants would result in a lifeless universe

Vast numbers of other universes coupled with widely varying laws(Zero empirical evidence for either)

Life No plausible naturalistic theory “occurred in spite of minuscule odds such as 1:10300 and which is accepted only because we are here. “ Schwabe(Circular reasoning)

Diversity of Life

Microevolution + roughly increasing levels of complexity in fossil record over time

Evolution is as proven as gravity(To prove naturalistic evolution one has to show whatever happened was not particularly improbable)

Consciousness and free will

No account for origin Consciousness and free will may be illusions; “We just need more time”(Popper: promissory materialism: imagined evidence is not evidence!)

Note that Naturalism is falsified unless it accounts for all origins issues

Atheist Thomas Nagel’s Honest Appraisal

“[D]oubts about the reductionist account of life go against the dominant scientific consensus, but that consensus faces problems of probability that I believe are not taken seriously enough, both with respect to the evolution of life forms through accidental mutation and natural selection and with respect to the formation from dead matter of physical systems capable of such evolution.““It is no longer legitimate simply to imagine a sequence of gradually evolving phenotypes, as if their appearance through mutations in the DNA were unproblematic -- as Richard Dawkins does for the evolution of the eye.”From recent book Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False

Origin of Biological Information“Each (human) cell... contains a digitally coded database larger, in information content, than all 30 volumes of the Encyclopaedia Britannica put together” DawkinsA single E. coli bacteria has the information content of an Encyclopedia

– 250 billion E. coli fit into a single teaspoon (information content of 20 stacks of Encyclopedia copies piled up to the moon)

Simplest organisms: Non-parasitic (~1500 genes), Parasitic (~470 genes)Origin of Life theories fail miserably in explaining origin of information and information processing

10

Amazing Aspects of DNA

Recent articles in Science and Nature note human engineers may utilize DNA commercially• Storage density: 2.2 petabytes per gram• Much better longevity than conventional storage

– Lasts tens of thousands of years• “Existing technologies for copying DNA are highly

efficient“• Choice of DNA has some optimal features

biologically– Serves as a parity code for error-checking

Chicken-Egg Problems

Numerous inter-dependent systems exist within simplest cell• DNA provides blueprints for building proteins

– Numerous highly specialized proteins needed for DNA replication» To unwind and uncoil DNA, split the strands, etc.

• RNA and proteins required to make proteins• Amino acids required to proteins

– RNA and proteins required to make amino acidsHow does all this randomly form in first cell and within a membrane?And we cannot plausibly prebiotically form any of these!

14

Protein Translation System

Source: hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.eduSystem exhibits irreducible complexity– A functional subset exists from which cannot be further reduced without

losing all functionality– Darwinian process works step-by-step where each step has functional

advantage 15

Eugene Koonin’s Origin of Life Paper

“For biological evolution that is governed primarily by natural selection to take off, efficient systems for replication and translation are required, but even barebones cores of these systems appear to be products of extensive selection.”

– “The RNA World concept … so far cannot adequately account for the emergence of an efficient RNA replicase or the translation system”

• “Eternal inflation offers a viable alternative that is untenable in a finite universe, i.e. that a coupled system of translation and replication emerged by chance.”

• Anthropic reasoning would still require that this chance-only path be more likely than evolution!“It is clear that OORT [Origin of Replication and Translation] is not just the hardest problem in all of evolutionary biology but one that is qualitatively distinct from the rest.”

– Koonin describes a “dreary vicious circle: what would be the selective force behind the evolution of the extremely complex translation system before there were functional proteins? And, of course, there could be no proteins without a sufficiently effective translation system.”

– 1 chance in 101018 based on 1% RNA in top 10km of 1 earth-sized habitable planet per 10 solar systems in entire universe

• Koonin considers his RNA synthesis rate “a deliberate, gross over-estimate”– “There is no empirical or rational justification for theorizing that the random shuffling of nucleotides

could generate instructions for a metabolic network.”

Biology’s Worst Problem in Irreducible Complexity:

Protein Translation System

Can’t rely on evolution to evolve the first protein-based evolver!Koonin appeals to an infinite multiverse to solve the problem:“Any conceivable scenario of life's evolution necessarily requires combinations of highly unlikely conditions and events prior to the onset of biological evolution, including the abiogenic synthesis of fairly complex and not particularly stable organic molecules, such as nucleotides, the concentration of these molecules within appropriate compartments, and their polymerization yielding polynucleotides of sufficient size and diversity. Thus, anthropic selection appears to be an inevitable aspect of life's evolution.”

Minimal Complexity of Protein Translation System (based on E-Coli)– Ribosome has 52 proteins (7459 amino acids), 4566 RNA nucleotides

• 90K atoms in large subunit alone• Craig Venter’s team unsuccessful in making synthetic ribosomes: “Nobody knows how to get ones that can actually do protein synthesis…. And you can’t have life without it.”

– 106 proteins, 31 tRNA’s, & 20 aaRS’s (to establish genetic code)– Available amino acids, ATP for energy to drive reactions– mRNA information content to direct protein synthesis and via genetic code– How do you evolve an integrated code-driven system for making proteins before proteins even exist? – Natural selection can only favor some organisms over others not by itself innovate!

Is there Bias in Science?

Consider one of the peer reviewers of this article:• “In this review, I will simply try to rephrase what a serious problem Koonin

has identified according to me, and I will argue that I am afraid his answer to this problem might open too broad an avenue to the supporters of intelligent design.”

• “I am afraid his present (and arguable) solution, although fairly underlining one of the limits of traditional evolutionary thinking, could open a huge door to the tenants of intelligent design.” Eric Bapteste

• Bapteste also questions Darwin’s Tree of Life:– "For a long time the holy grail was to build a tree of life. We have no evidence

at all that the tree of life is a reality."

Programming Within Cells

– “Machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like. Apart from differences in jargon, the pages of a molecular biology journal might be interchanged with those of a computer engineering journal“ Richard Dawkins

– “DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software we've ever created.” Bill Gates

– Groups of 3 nucleotide bases map to one of 20 amino acids used to assemble a protein (scrabble/boggle analogy)

• Code in true sense of word – includes start and stop codes– There are other codes used by life as well

• Other codes drive gene regulation (histone)• Genetic code is optimized to allow for parallel codes

Features of Genetic Code

– DNA used solely for informational purpose• No connection between chemical properties and information content

– All other examples of codes originate from intelligence • Optimal choice of bases to form a parity code

– Built-in ability to detect errors via nucleotide choice• Hamming error-coding theory “anticipated by nature”

– Optimized to minimize errors in mapping to amino acids• Accounts for increased likelihood of certain types of mistakes• Supplies similar or exact amino acid when error occurs• Minimizes effects of frameshift mutations• Carries “arbitrary parallel codes better than the vast majority of

other possible genetic codes.” Genome Research

21

Error Minimization of Genetic Code

• Genetic code has “eerie perfection”, “startling evidence of optimization” Samuel Conway Morris

• Genetic Code is “One in a Trillion”• Or “it appears at or very close to a global optimum for error

minimization: the best of all possible codes.” Study by Univ. of Bath

Universal Genetic Code Argues for Design

Why genetic code cannot appreciably evolve:“Any mutation in the genetic code itself … would have an instantly catastrophic effect, not just in one place but throughout the whole organism. If any word in the 64-word dictionary changed its meaning, so that it came to specify a different amino acid, just about every protein in the body would instantaneously change, probably in many places along its length. Unlike an ordinary mutation...this would spell disaster.” Dawkins

Selection pressure is negative• Effect on all proteins is detrimental• Relative optimization benefits are tiny• Minor variance in codes occurs

– All are less optimal than canonical code

Even if it could evolve, is there time?• Yockey: natural selection would have to

explore 1.4x1070 codes in 6.3 x 1015 secs• Age of genetic code seems to coincide

with life23

Next Week

A skeptical look at skepticism– Is it irrational to be overly skeptical?By– Beau Bishop– Beau is the co-director of the overall

Reasonable Faith ministry

24

Questions

Junk DNA

• Example of evidence against intelligent design– Junk DNA

• Prediction– If God, no necessarily no junk but minimal initial junk …

• ENCODE project– At least 80%– 1 author – “likely that 80% will go to 100%”– “almost inconceivably intricate”– There is more to explain -> RNA splicing codes …– “surprising” comments common (from ev perspective)

Venter• The lay press likes to talk about creating life from scratch. But while we can create

and develop new species, we're not creating life from scratch. We talked about the ribosome; we tried to make synthetic ribosomes, starting with the genetic code and building them — the ribosome is such an incredibly beautiful complex entity, you can make synthetic ribosomes, but they don't function totally yet. Nobody knows how to get ones that can actually do protein synthesis. But starting with an intact ribosome is cheating anyway right? That is not building life from scratch but relying on billions of years of evolution. When starting with an existing protein synthesis machinery we can create new life forms, we can create a synthetic chromosome that we can now do transplants of, and develop new species with very unique properties — so we can create human-made species — but we're not really creating life from scratch. You can boot up a system but right now all life derives from other living entities. What we're doing is really no different, because we're just putting a new operating system into a living cell.

Church• The ribosome, both looking at the past and at the future, is a very significant structure — it's

the most complicated thing that is present in all organisms. Craig does comparative genomics, and you find that almost the only thing that's in common across all organisms is the ribosome. And it's recognizable; it's highly conserved. So the question is, how did that thing come to be? And if I were to be an intelligent design defender, that's what I would focus on; how did the ribosome come to be? The only way we're going to become good scientists and prove that it could come into being spontaneously is to develop a much better in vitro system where you can make smaller versions of the ribosome that still work, and make all kinds of variations on it to do really useful things but that are really wildly different, and so forth, and get real familiarity with this really complicated machine. Because it does a really great thing: it does this mutual information trick, but not from changing something kind of trivial, from DNA to RNA; that's really easy. It can change from DNA three nucleotides into one amino acid. That's really marvelous. We need to understand that better.

• VENTER: And you can't have life without it.• …• CHURCH: But isn't it the case that, if we take all the life forms we have so far, isn't the

minimum for the ribosome about 53 proteins and 3 polynucleotides? And hasn't that kind of already reached a plateau where adding more genomes doesn‘t reduce that number of proteins?

What about Metabolism First?

• Orgel “In my opinion, there is no basis in known chemistry for the belief that long sequences of reactions can organize spontaneously – and every reason to believe that they cannot.”

• Orgel’s last paper – the “solutions offered by supporters of geneticist or metabolist scenarios that are dependent on “if pigs could fly” hypothetical chemistry are unlikely to help.”

Histone-Binding Code

Histone-Binding Code

Opposition to ID

• Redefine ID as religious “Intelligent Design Creationism”• Demonize and discredit opponents• Don’t allow papers to enter into peer reviewed journals

– Then discredit ID movement for lack of peer-reviewed papers• Play up science vs. religion warfare myth invented in enlightenment

– “Despite a developing consensus among scholars that science and Christianity have not been at war, the notion of conflict has refused to die” Coleman and Numbers

• Presume philosophical naturalism – Everything viewed as a research problem – independent of evidence

• “We just need more time to find the naturalistic solution”• Any counter evidence viewed as “God of the gaps”

– Science actually would require major changes to overturn design evidence:• Beginning of universe• Fine-tuning of initial conditions of universe and constants• Origin of Life• Evolution of new genes, irreducibly complex systems

Craig Venter Creates Synthetic Life Form

Craig Venter and his team have built the genome of a bacterium from scratch and

incorporated it into a cell to make what they call the world's first synthetic life form

The Guardian, May 20, 2010Ian Samples, Science Correspondent

Synthetic BiologyPractical Applications:• Biomedicine• Biotechnology

Synthetic Biology and the Origin of Life

Synthetic Biology• Create artificial life

• Build life in the lab starting with simple chemicals

• Free to use any means available

Origin of Life• Understand how life

originated on Earth

• Recapitulate origin of life in lab starting with simple chemicals

• Constrained by condition of early Earth