The Origin of Life: A Fundamental Question

Advances in science and technology have provided humanity with an amazing array of photos depicting both the complexity and enormity of the universe. Since scientific exploration, along with related observations that portray an unpredictable randomness, there is one theory built around the concept of continual expansion; while yet another theory that maintains the universe to be finite.

There are an estimated 100 to 300 billion galaxies in the universe—with the observed dynamics within these galactic bodies providing visuals of events that unfolded millions of years ago—is it any wonder that there exist significant divergent scientific theories relating to the origin of life on Planet Earth?

The “Big Bang” is the most widely accepted theory; many manifestations of which are taught in public schools as well as institutions of higher learning. Implied—but seldom spoken publicly—within these theories is the concept that every life form on this planet is the result of unpredictable randomness; that all life represents nothing more than the product(s) of galactic happenstance.

Personally, I see the odds of such an occurrence as an immeasurable improbability.

As one not schooled in physics or science, what I do see, nonetheless, is a solar system with order; comprised of a sun encircled by nine planets constantly moving in precise elliptical orbits; all held in said order by some invisible magnetism; with the orbits of each planet being perfectly timed and spatially arranged so as to form a functional and eternally sustaining system.

Earth is the crown jewel in this arrangement; with it’s stunning beauty a joy to behold. Yet even more amazing are the many life-sustaining features our planet provides. Here are but a few examples:

-- Earth’s orbit around the sun and rotation on it’s axis provide us with measurements in seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, months and years; while also giving us day and night for heating and cooling.

-- Invisible spherical gaseous layers surrounding the planet provide filtration from the sun’s rays, containment of evaporated water, later to be formed into clouds that dispense water for irrigation and drinking, as well as the filtering and cleaning of air born toxins.

-- Melt-off from polar ice caps feed the world’s lakes, rivers and aquifers. Most amazing is the process whereby frozen salt water is converted into saltless ice.

-- Every specie of life—whether animal or vegetable; whether on or under the earth; or in oceans, lakes or rivers—is anatomically and biologically equipped to reproduce; thereby assuring every living thing on Planet Earth is equipped—environmentally permitting—to survive and thrive.

Even the most remote suggestion that all of these things that have happened (and to this very day are still occurring) are the result of serendipitous evolution -- is nothing less than pure folly. I am particularly enamored of a quote by Edward Conklin which posits: “The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the unabridged dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop.”

Yet education industry’s mucky-mucks—bolstered by organized labor’s American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association—have actively and vociferously opposed the introduction of course work built around the concept of intelligent design. A quick perusal of AFT’s and NEA’s “issues” page(s) reveal they wield far more influence within the sphere of public education than the mere representation of teachers and their working conditions, salary and benefit packages.

From a purely temporal perspective, neither the evolution theorists nor the intelligent design people can prove their assertions scientifically; which leaves the entire matter to being a question of faith -- of what one believes. Why, then, is one side—intelligent design—deliberately and purposefully excluded from the curricula of public education?

My wife’s ophthalmologist, during a post-operation exam, revealed to us that there are cells within the eye that are programmed to consume the blood from either injury and/or post-op conditions. Can that be an accident? When but that one simple fact is put in perspective with all the various parts and functions of the human body, to deny the existence of intelligent design is, in this writer’s opinion, bordering on criminal negligence.

To program a child into believing that s/he came from nothing more than a Matrix-like artificial intelligence accident -- totally undermines the concept of absolute right and wrong behaviors; for the laws that govern same will then be arbitrary; leaving humanity in the turbulent state of affairs in which we find ourselves today.