Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

SignUp Now!
  • Welcome to Talk Jesus Christian Forums

    Celebrating 20 Years!

    A bible based, Jesus Christ centered community.

    Register Log In

The odds of evolution. Mathematical facts.

B-A-C

Loyal
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
11,953
THE COSMIC LOTTERYWhy Winning Powerball While Being Abducted by Aliens is More Likely Than Evolution




Picture this: You're sitting in your backyard on a Tuesday afternoon. The mailman arrives with three envelopes—you've just won Powerball, Mega Millions, AND your state lottery. As you're processing this impossibility, a UFO descends and aliens begin their abduction procedure. At that exact moment, a Boeing 747 loses power and crashes into your garden shed.


The odds? Roughly 1 in 10^52.


Absurd, right? Impossible, even?


Yet this scenario is infinitely more likely than what you learned in biology class: that random processes created Earth's 8.7 million species.


Let me explain.




THE WEB SERVER IN THE WOODS


One day, billions of years ago, some sand (silicon), copper, iron, steel, and carbide were blown together in just the right amount and order by a dust devil. They were struck by lightning, and poof—a computer was created.


But alas, the poor computer had no keyboard. A few centuries later, some copper and solidified petroleum washed up nearby, and boom—wouldn't you know it, another perfectly accidental flash of lightning created an I/O keyboard.


Boy, were we lucky. But wait, that's not the best part.


Some small mammals were walking around on the keyboard, and by sheer stroke of luck, they accidentally typed in an operating system. Amoeba on the storage chips ate away at certain sections of the device, in just the right places to make it persistent.


A few centuries later, more mammals got real lucky and created libraries, language models, compilers—all by randomly walking around on the keyboard. Talk about a lucky break. The computer was now functional but had nothing to do.


A bush grew near the keyboard, and the wind blew the branches randomly over millions of years. It accidentally typed in a web server, then randomly typed in some web pages.


Voilà! A web server just randomly happened in nature. It took a couple billion years, and the material magically lasted that long, but hey—it's possible, right?




People would say: "No way. That could never happen. Too many random events, and each one is one in a million."


Then I'd ask: "Do you believe in DNA and genome coding?"




THE MISSING PROTOTYPES


Here's the kicker: If evolution is true—if nature really built life through trial and error over billions of years—where are the trial versions?


Every complex system humans design requires prototypes. Windows 1.0 came before Windows 11. The Model T came before the Tesla. The Wright Flyer came before the 747. We fail, learn, adjust, and try again.


But nature? According to the fossil record, nature built it perfectly on the first try.


No prototypes. No rough drafts. No "Computer 0.5" that booted but crashed. Just fully functional species, appearing suddenly in the fossil record, with no clear intermediates leading up to them.


The Cambrian Explosion, about 540 million years ago, shows trilobites with complex eyes, mollusks with shells, arthropods with jointed legs—all fully formed. Below that layer? Simple organisms. No clear precursors. No trial runs.


Darwin himself called this "the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." He hoped future discoveries would fill the gaps.


150 years later, we've found billions of fossils. The gaps remain.


Species appear. Species remain largely unchanged. Species disappear. But the smooth transitions Darwin predicted? They're not there.


Even their best example—Archaeopteryx, the supposed "missing link" between reptiles and birds—is a fully functional bird with feathers, wings, and the ability to fly. Not a prototype. A finished product.


This isn't trial and error. This is perfect execution on the first try. And perfect execution requires a perfect Designer.




CHECK THE EXPIRATION DATES


Open your refrigerator. Everything has an expiration date. Milk spoils in two weeks. Medicine loses potency after a few years. DNA itself has a half-life of 521 years—after 6.8 million years, every bond should be broken.


Why? Because everything degrades over time. Not improves. Not organizes. Degrades.


This is the Second Law of Thermodynamics: entropy always increases. Systems move toward disorder, not order. Heat disperses. Energy dissipates. Complex structures break down.


Yet evolution requires the opposite: time building complexity. Amino acids forming proteins. Proteins forming cells. Cells forming organs. Simple organisms becoming complex.


But amino acids have an expiration date too—about seven years in water. So even if Miller-Urey's experiment could produce them in a "primordial soup," they'd break down faster than they could assemble into anything useful.


Time is not evolution's friend. It's the enemy.


The "just add time" excuse doesn't work when your building blocks have expiration dates.




OOPS, LAVA


Even if—against all mathematical probability—the first organism somehow formed, it faces a problem: it has no brain. No instincts. No survival mechanisms. It can't avoid danger because those abilities haven't evolved yet.


So the first organism forms (miracle #1), and then: Oops, lava flow incinerates it.


Nature has to win the lottery again. Same impossible odds.


Second organism forms. Oops, a predator eats it. (Wait, where did that predator come from?)


Third organism forms. Oops, drought dries it out.


Fourth organism forms. Oops, UV radiation shreds its DNA.


How many times does nature need to roll the dice and get a perfect outcome? Thousands? Millions? And where are the fossils of all these failed attempts?


We don't find them. Because according to the fossil record, nature got it right every time. No failed prototypes. Just perfect products.


But here's the bigger problem: You don't just need one organism. You need a population—at least 50 individuals to avoid inbreeding, ideally 500 for genetic diversity. So multiply those impossible odds by 50 to 500.


And you need this to happen 8.7 million times—once for every species on Earth.


Each species needs:


  • Unique DNA (billions of base pairs in specific sequences)
  • Unique proteins (thousands per species, each requiring precise folding)
  • Unique organ systems (eyes, hearts, digestive systems)
  • Unique behaviors (mating rituals, hunting strategies, social structures)

This isn't one lottery win. It's 8.7 million lottery wins.




THE COMPARISON


Let's do the math.


Your absurd scenario:


  • Win three national lotteries simultaneously: 1 in 292 million × 1 in 302 million × 1 in 300 million = roughly 1 in 10^25
  • Get abducted by aliens: 1 in 10^11 (conservatively)
  • Have a 747 crash in your yard: 1 in 10^15
  • Combined odds: approximately 1 in 10^52

Evolution's scenario:


  • Creating functional DNA for one species: roughly 1 in 10^40,000 (conservative estimate)
  • Multiply by 8.7 million species
  • Account for multiple attempts needed due to hazards
  • Account for population requirements
  • Account for ecosystem integration (predators and prey evolving simultaneously)
  • Combined odds: approximately 1 in 10^8,700,000,000,000

Evolution is 10^8.7 trillion times less likely than your lottery/alien/plane scenario.


That means you winning three lotteries while being abducted by aliens while a 747 crashes in your yard is infinitely more probable than random processes creating all life on Earth.


So yes—go buy those lottery tickets. Your odds are stellar compared to evolution's.




TILTING AT WINDMILLS


In Cervantes' classic novel, Don Quixote charges at windmills, convinced they're giants. His squire, Sancho Panza, tries to explain: "Master, those aren't giants—they're windmills!" But Don Quixote won't listen. He charges anyway, gets knocked around, and blames "enchantment" for his failure.


It's tragic. It's comic. It's tragicomedy.


Evolutionists have been tilting at windmills for 150 years:


Windmill #1: "The missing links are out there—we just need to keep digging!"Reality: Billions of fossils found. Still no clear transitional forms.


Windmill #2: "Time will solve everything—just wait long enough!"Reality: Time destroys complexity. Check your expiration dates.


Windmill #3: "Mutations create new information!"Reality: Mutations delete or corrupt information 99.99% of the time. Never observed creating complex new features.


Windmill #4: "Natural selection explains everything!"Reality: Selection filters existing information. It doesn't create new information. You can't select for what doesn't exist yet.


Windmill #5: "Life arose naturally in a primordial soup!"Reality: 70+ years of trying to recreate it in labs with intelligent design has produced zero living cells.


Windmill #6: "DNA similarity proves common ancestry!"Reality: Humans share 50% DNA with bananas. Does that make us half-banana? Similarity can indicate common Designer, not just common ancestor.


The pattern is identical: See something ordinary. Interpret it through the evolutionary lens. Get knocked down by evidence. Blame "incomplete data" or "creationists." Charge again.


The rest of us—the Sancho Panzas of the world—keep trying to explain: "Those aren't giants. They're windmills. Look at them!"


But the academic Don Quixotes won't listen.




THE EXPENSIVE COMEDY


Here's the real tragedy: We're paying for this.


Universities charge $50,000+ per year to teach evolutionary biology. Four years equals $200,000+ for a degree. If you question the theory, you fail the course. If professors question it, they lose tenure. If researchers publish findings that contradict it, journals reject their papers.


This isn't education. It's indoctrination.


We're funding a tragicomedy—paying thousands of dollars per semester to watch professors tilt at windmills with straight faces, calling it "science," and punishing anyone who points out they're windmills.


The Apostle Paul described this 2,000 years ago: "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22). People suppress the truth, exchange it for a lie, and then defend the lie with academic credentials and peer pressure.


The emperor has no clothes. And we're paying tuition to be told his wardrobe is magnificent.




THE ONLY LOGICAL ANSWER


So where did all these species come from?


Option 1: Random processes


  • Mathematically impossible (10^-trillions odds)
  • No evidence of transitional forms (no prototypes)
  • Contradicts observation (never seen one kind becoming another)
  • Violates thermodynamics (time destroys, doesn't create)
  • Requires information from non-intelligence (never observed)

Option 2: God created kinds


  • Genesis 1:21, 24-25: "God created... every living creature... according to their kinds"
  • Each kind with built-in variation (dogs can vary into wolves, poodles, dingoes—but stay dogs)
  • Clear boundaries (dogs can't become cats)
  • Sudden appearance in fossil record (Cambrian Explosion matches this)
  • Perfect execution from the start (no prototypes needed—Designer knows what works)
  • Information from Intelligence (matches all observation)

One option requires 8.7 million impossible miracles, coordinated across time and space, with no evidence.


One option requires one intelligent Creator.


Occam's Razor: Choose the simpler explanation.


"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)


No lottery required. No aliens needed. No impossible odds. Just an intelligent, powerful, purposeful Creator doing what only intelligence can do: design.




THE CHALLENGE


The next time someone tells you evolution is "proven science," ask them three questions:


1. Where are the missing links?If trial and error happened over billions of years, we should have trillions of failed attempts fossilized. We have billions of fossils. Where are the prototypes? No prototypes means perfect first-try execution. And that requires a Designer.


2. Where did the information come from?DNA is code. Every code we've ever observed requires a coder. Mutations corrupt code—they don't write new programs. So where did the original programming come from?


3. What are the odds?If my lottery/alien/plane scenario is absurd at 1 in 10^52, how is evolution rational at 1 in 10^8.7 trillion?


Then watch them appeal to "time" or "experts" or "consensus."


But none of those change the math.None of those change the evidence.None of those change the logic.


The windmills are still windmills, no matter how many Don Quixotes charge at them.




Don Quixote eventually came to his senses on his deathbed. He finally admitted: "I was mad. I see clearly now."


One day, evolutionary biology will have the same moment of clarity.


The windmills will stop looking like giants.The missing links will stop being "just around the corner."The impossible odds will stop being ignored.


And someone will finally say: "We were wrong. It was design all along."


Until that day, the academic Don Quixotes will keep charging.The windmills will keep spinning.And Genesis 1:1 will keep being true.


"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."


Not windmills.Not giants.Not random processes.


Just God.
 
Nice!

Agreed, the math of evolution doesn't work. Does any evolutionist bring up the many-worlds interpretation? IMHO Occam's Razor eliminates that solution vs God created...
 
We need to be clear here. Maths does not debunk evolution. It simply moves the timing of the big bang from 13.8 billion years ago to a number close to infinity.

The fact that God is good and that natural selection (required for evolution) is evil, is what completely and utterly debunks evolution.
 
Isn't natural selection observable even today? An extended challenging period results in a surviving population that is best suited to survive the challenge. For God's design for life to survive long term he had to build in some adaptability. Is that evil?

If you simulate evolution more time only makes things worse not better. This agrees with the math and @B-A-C's statement: "Time is not evolution's friend. It's the enemy" so lengthening the time available doesn't fix evolution.
 
It simply moves the timing of the big bang from 13.8 billion years ago to a number close to infinity.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics:

In a closed system, entropy (disorder) always increases over time. Everything tends toward maximum entropy - heat death, equilibrium, uselessness.

If the universe is near-infinitely old:
  1. It should have already reached maximum entropy - heat death
  2. All usable energy would be exhausted
  3. No stars, no life, no complex structures - just cold, dead equilibrium
  4. We wouldn't be here having this conversation
The problem gets worse, not better:
  • 13.8 billion years is already pushing it for spontaneous generation of life
  • Near-infinite timedoesn't help because:
    • Systems decay over time, they don't become MORE ordered
    • You can't "wait long enough" for entropy to reverse itself
    • More time = more decay, not more organization
It's like saying: "Given enough time, my house will spontaneously clean itself, fix its own roof, and upgrade its own wiring."

No - given enough time, your house collapses into rubble.

The probability argument AND the thermodynamics argument both point the same direction:
 
If we say the universe is 13-14 billion years.. then we can say "well there wasn't enough time".
But if we say the universe is 100 or 200billion years old, OK, maybe there was enough time, but by
the universe has lost all energy. All of the lighter elements have dissappeared. All of the stars have
burned out, there is no energy left.

But that hasn't happened yet, we see trillions of stars, and most of them still have lighter elements.
So the universe can't be that old. If it is that old, there has to be another source, something fueling it.
(God?)

So on one hand it can't be too young (not enough time to create DNA) but also it can't be too old
(all entropy and energy are gone, fuel ran out). Everything has an expiration date. Even the universe itself.
The milk on your fridge, food in your pantry (except for maybe twinkies!) the hgas in your car, even medicines
and chemichals eventually expire. Amino acids have a shelf life of about 7 years in water.

Supposedly we climbed out of the sea and became mammals. They means we evolved to a mobile multi-celled animals
in 7 years or less.
 
If our Sun was "billions of years" old like the evo-cult think it is, then it would've run out of fuel long before "Earth cooled enough, was stable enough, and for it to rain and have conditions for earliest life". Simple.
God said it and IT happened. Simple. End of story.
 
The Second Law of Thermodynamics:

In a closed system, entropy (disorder) always increases over time. Everything tends toward maximum entropy - heat death, equilibrium, uselessness.

If the universe is near-infinitely old:
  1. It should have already reached maximum entropy - heat death
  2. All usable energy would be exhausted
  3. No stars, no life, no complex structures - just cold, dead equilibrium
  4. We wouldn't be here having this conversation
The problem gets worse, not better:
  • 13.8 billion years is already pushing it for spontaneous generation of life
  • Near-infinite timedoesn't help because:
    • Systems decay over time, they don't become MORE ordered
    • You can't "wait long enough" for entropy to reverse itself
    • More time = more decay, not more organization
It's like saying: "Given enough time, my house will spontaneously clean itself, fix its own roof, and upgrade its own wiring."

No - given enough time, your house collapses into rubble.

The probability argument AND the thermodynamics argument both point the same direction:

You are misunderstanding me. I am not saying evolution is sound and can work if given near infinity years. Simply if you have infinity years it is more believable.
 
You are misunderstanding me. I am not saying evolution is sound and can work if given near infinity years. Simply if you have infinity years it is more believable.

I think we are on the same page here. But we believe in a creator. Maybe people do not.
They say God is a myth, and we were created by random chance. The point here is, we could not be created by random chance.
There is no possible way, no one believes a computer could be created by random chance, and we are hundreds of time more complex.
Our DNA code is far too precise. At the kicker is (because there are no missing link fossils) it happened perfectly on the first try.

The odds of that?
 
I think we are on the same page here. But we believe in a creator. Maybe people do not.
They say God is a myth, and we were created by random chance. The point here is, we could not be created by random chance.
There is no possible way, no one believes a computer could be created by random chance, and we are hundreds of time more complex.
Our DNA code is far too precise. At the kicker is (because there are no missing link fossils) it happened perfectly on the first try.

The odds of that?

So for me, after having discussed for many years with a biologist who was a 'Christian evolutionist', the heart of the matter is this:

God can set an atom in motion that can evolve. He can do anything. Why God did not do this is because evolution requires natural selection. And natural selection is pure evil. Just ask the guy you ate to grow your third arm.

God is not evil. He hates evil. All evil has to be traced back to either fallen angels or fallen man. If we were created by evolutionary means, evil, in the form of natural selection will be traced back to God and not angels or man.

Any type of creation via evolution prior to the fall of man and or angels is completely and utterly incompatible with all scripture. Especially this one:

Psalm 145:17 The Lord is righteous in all his ways and faithful in all he does.
 
Isn't natural selection observable even today?

That there are some examples of natural selection today is irrelevant. Please see my post # 10 to BAC.

An extended challenging period results in a surviving population that is best suited to survive the challenge. For God's design for life to survive long term he had to build in some adaptability. Is that evil?

Yes. Natural selection is evil. It is survival of the fittest. Greeks were pure evil when they killed babies and children that were not good specimens.

If you simulate evolution more time only makes things worse not better. This agrees with the math and @B-A-C's statement: "Time is not evolution's friend. It's the enemy" so lengthening the time available doesn't fix evolution.

Lengthening time does if the first atoms were created by God. Evolution is very believable. Many Christians are evolutionists. We need to better discern the evil of this belief.

It implies three heresies that make it completely and utterly incompatible with Christianity.

1. God is evil

He created mankind by natural selection. If anyone doesn't think it is evil, come visit me so that I can kill you, take your wife and assets for myself. Ensuring my seed lives on.

2. The cross is a joke.

Who did Jesus die for? Sahelanthropus tchadensis 6 million years ago or Homo sapiens 300k years ago?

3. Christianity is a joke

Christianity requires repentance of sin. Repentance of sin requires high intelligence, being a creation able to be accountable for their actions. Did Adam consult with his father in the trees on his eating of the fruit? Do all humans before Adam not need to be Christian? The bible says only Christians go to heaven and that God wills all to be saved and know Him. How do you get a dumb Sahelanthropus tchadensis to grasp Christianity?

----------------

God created man highly intelligent.

Heb 2:7 You made them a little lower than the angels; you crowned them with glory and honor.

Able to grasp good and evil.

Gen 3:22 he man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil
 
Excellent word. Words are powerful and the enemy knows this. That's why they use words like homophobic, transphobic... These words suggest that anyone who disagrees with their agenda has an irrational fear. Reality is that their agenda it is based on lies, nonsense and sin so rejecting is perfectly rational.
I think we are on the same page here. But we believe in a creator. Maybe people do not.
For bible believers who are not in the evo-cult, evolution isn't a problem. For people in the evo-cult it is a huge obstacle to believing the gospel and getting saved which is why the enemy pushes evolution so hard. A thread like this equips Christians with arguments when sharing the gospel and encountering evo-cult members who outright reject the God of the bible because they see evolution as an established scientific fact.

The many-worlds interpretation (MWI) that I brought up above resolves some paradoxes like Schrödinger's cat being both dead and alive and faster than light "spooky action at a distance". I wonder if the MWI could be used by some to explain away the mathematical impossibility of evolution by claiming we are somehow magically always following the infinitely improbable branch of the multiverse where evolution works. I think it takes much more blind faith to believe in the MWI than in the God of the bible.
 
You are misunderstanding me. I am not saying evolution is sound and can work if given near infinity years. Simply if you have infinity years it is more believable.
If the argument can "add more time" it does NOT work.
Our planet and life REQUIRE sunlight.

When the Sun uses up most of the hydrogen in its core, gravity wins for a moment and the core begins to contract. That triggers a sequence of changes:
  • Core hydrogen is exhausted.
  • Hydrogen fusion continues in a shell around the core.
  • The outer layers expand enormously.
  • The Sun becomes:
    • Much larger
    • Much brighter
    • Cooler at the surface (hence “red”)
☀️ The Sun will likely expand past Mercury and Venus, and may reach or engulf Earth.
Nowhere in history is there evidence of:
Primordial soup ->single cell organism ->first aquatic life in DIFFERENT FORMS) -> lizard thing -> human and all other creatures.

A cat (regardless of kind) has ONLY ever had a cat.
A bird (regardless of kind) has ONLY ever had a cat.
A human (regardless of skin color, or ethnic group) has ONLY ever had a human.

Those who argue for it neglect clarification and context.
 
If our Sun was "billions of years" old like the evo-cult think it is, then it would've run out of fuel long before "Earth cooled enough, was stable enough, and for it to rain and have conditions for earliest life". Simple.
This is probably the simplest and strongest argument. The mathematical argument in the OP (original post) is very strong but math isn't for everyone. Do you have a link/reference that elaborates on this?

Any type of creation via evolution prior to the fall of man and or angels is completely and utterly incompatible with all scripture.
I actually agree that that micro evolution (adaptability) and natural selection are post fall. God created angels and humans with the ability to choose Him or reject Him (rejecting good/God is choosing evil). satan and a third of the angels chose evil. Adam and Eve chose evil. With this choice mankind fell thus handing over dominion of this fallen world to satan. God is the only creator. God sets the parameters of the fallen world and satan rules it but is restrained by God. By the grace of God we humans now get the wonderful opportunity to choose Him/Jesus in this fallen evil world.
Absolutely none of this surprised God in any way!
Everyone in the kingdom of God will have chosen Jesus.

A bird (regardless of kind) has ONLY ever had a cat.
A typo:
A bird (regardless of kind) has ONLY ever had a catbird.
 
This is probably the simplest and strongest argument. The mathematical argument in the OP (original post) is very strong but math isn't for everyone. Do you have a link/reference that elaborates on this?


I actually agree that that micro evolution (adaptability) and natural selection are post fall. God created angels and humans with the ability to choose Him or reject Him (rejecting good/God is choosing evil). satan and a third of the angels chose evil. Adam and Eve chose evil. With this choice mankind fell thus handing over dominion of this fallen world to satan. God is the only creator. God sets the parameters of the fallen world and satan rules it but is restrained by God. By the grace of God we humans now get the wonderful opportunity to choose Him/Jesus in this fallen evil world.
Absolutely none of this surprised God in any way!
Everyone in the kingdom of God will have chosen Jesus.


A typo:
A bird (regardless of kind) has ONLY ever had a catbird.
Mistype.
 
Evolution is a made up word to try and reason out things of importance without the need for God, when evolution is sited its nothing more than the "adaptation" that God put into the life He created.
 
Just something to consider before we get 'too upset' with evolutionists.

When you put yourself in the shoes of a scientist operating within the observable laws of physics. You soon realise that it is literally impossible to in anyway shape or form explain the origin of a God Creator. All you can and should do is look at the observable facts.

I have all the time in the world for honest scientists that feel facts lead to evolution or a type of it.

My patience dies when any of them use evolution to support a big bang or any attempt to bypass God. As all the evidence around us points to God. We may not be able to ever grasp how He came to be, but make no mistake, He is and all the evidence around us points to intelligent design. Literally all. Even the fingers and brain I am using to type this. I get a kick out of asking atheists to tell me all about their disbelief without using their amazingly designed mouth to speak or hands to type
 
When you put yourself in the shoes of a scientist operating within the observable laws of physics. You soon realise that it is literally impossible to in anyway shape or form explain the origin of a God Creator. All you can and should do is look at the observable facts.
Excellent point! It is a scope problem. I once worked at programming flight simulators. As creator I could instantly change the weather, change the aircraft's position, heading, speed, add/remove aircraft damage, create additional aircraft... The pilot could only operate within the rules.

The scientist operates within the rules and miracles are impossible. God, as creator of this world operates at a different level so all of the bible's miracles are easily possible to him.

Just something to consider before we get 'too upset' with evolutionists.
Another excellent point! We should be loving above all else. I have little success sharing the gospel so I try to watch testimonials of people who come to Christ. A pattern I observe is that arguments/apologetics may help remove obstacles so faith can at least be possible in their world view but feeling loved by Christians/Christ has the greatest effect.

A movie I saw recently showed "On the Origin of Species" read to a child. It is their bible so exposing its faults is still an important task for Truth to prevail.
 
THE COSMIC LOTTERYWhy Winning Powerball While Being Abducted by Aliens is More Likely Than Evolution




Picture this: You're sitting in your backyard on a Tuesday afternoon. The mailman arrives with three envelopes—you've just won Powerball, Mega Millions, AND your state lottery. As you're processing this impossibility, a UFO descends and aliens begin their abduction procedure. At that exact moment, a Boeing 747 loses power and crashes into your garden shed.


The odds? Roughly 1 in 10^52.


Absurd, right? Impossible, even?


Yet this scenario is infinitely more likely than what you learned in biology class: that random processes created Earth's 8.7 million species.


Let me explain.




THE WEB SERVER IN THE WOODS


One day, billions of years ago, some sand (silicon), copper, iron, steel, and carbide were blown together in just the right amount and order by a dust devil. They were struck by lightning, and poof—a computer was created.


But alas, the poor computer had no keyboard. A few centuries later, some copper and solidified petroleum washed up nearby, and boom—wouldn't you know it, another perfectly accidental flash of lightning created an I/O keyboard.


Boy, were we lucky. But wait, that's not the best part.


Some small mammals were walking around on the keyboard, and by sheer stroke of luck, they accidentally typed in an operating system. Amoeba on the storage chips ate away at certain sections of the device, in just the right places to make it persistent.


A few centuries later, more mammals got real lucky and created libraries, language models, compilers—all by randomly walking around on the keyboard. Talk about a lucky break. The computer was now functional but had nothing to do.


A bush grew near the keyboard, and the wind blew the branches randomly over millions of years. It accidentally typed in a web server, then randomly typed in some web pages.


Voilà! A web server just randomly happened in nature. It took a couple billion years, and the material magically lasted that long, but hey—it's possible, right?




People would say: "No way. That could never happen. Too many random events, and each one is one in a million."


Then I'd ask: "Do you believe in DNA and genome coding?"




THE MISSING PROTOTYPES


Here's the kicker: If evolution is true—if nature really built life through trial and error over billions of years—where are the trial versions?


Every complex system humans design requires prototypes. Windows 1.0 came before Windows 11. The Model T came before the Tesla. The Wright Flyer came before the 747. We fail, learn, adjust, and try again.


But nature? According to the fossil record, nature built it perfectly on the first try.


No prototypes. No rough drafts. No "Computer 0.5" that booted but crashed. Just fully functional species, appearing suddenly in the fossil record, with no clear intermediates leading up to them.


The Cambrian Explosion, about 540 million years ago, shows trilobites with complex eyes, mollusks with shells, arthropods with jointed legs—all fully formed. Below that layer? Simple organisms. No clear precursors. No trial runs.


Darwin himself called this "the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." He hoped future discoveries would fill the gaps.


150 years later, we've found billions of fossils. The gaps remain.


Species appear. Species remain largely unchanged. Species disappear. But the smooth transitions Darwin predicted? They're not there.


Even their best example—Archaeopteryx, the supposed "missing link" between reptiles and birds—is a fully functional bird with feathers, wings, and the ability to fly. Not a prototype. A finished product.


This isn't trial and error. This is perfect execution on the first try. And perfect execution requires a perfect Designer.




CHECK THE EXPIRATION DATES


Open your refrigerator. Everything has an expiration date. Milk spoils in two weeks. Medicine loses potency after a few years. DNA itself has a half-life of 521 years—after 6.8 million years, every bond should be broken.


Why? Because everything degrades over time. Not improves. Not organizes. Degrades.


This is the Second Law of Thermodynamics: entropy always increases. Systems move toward disorder, not order. Heat disperses. Energy dissipates. Complex structures break down.


Yet evolution requires the opposite: time building complexity. Amino acids forming proteins. Proteins forming cells. Cells forming organs. Simple organisms becoming complex.


But amino acids have an expiration date too—about seven years in water. So even if Miller-Urey's experiment could produce them in a "primordial soup," they'd break down faster than they could assemble into anything useful.


Time is not evolution's friend. It's the enemy.


The "just add time" excuse doesn't work when your building blocks have expiration dates.




OOPS, LAVA


Even if—against all mathematical probability—the first organism somehow formed, it faces a problem: it has no brain. No instincts. No survival mechanisms. It can't avoid danger because those abilities haven't evolved yet.


So the first organism forms (miracle #1), and then: Oops, lava flow incinerates it.


Nature has to win the lottery again. Same impossible odds.


Second organism forms. Oops, a predator eats it. (Wait, where did that predator come from?)


Third organism forms. Oops, drought dries it out.


Fourth organism forms. Oops, UV radiation shreds its DNA.


How many times does nature need to roll the dice and get a perfect outcome? Thousands? Millions? And where are the fossils of all these failed attempts?


We don't find them. Because according to the fossil record, nature got it right every time. No failed prototypes. Just perfect products.


But here's the bigger problem: You don't just need one organism. You need a population—at least 50 individuals to avoid inbreeding, ideally 500 for genetic diversity. So multiply those impossible odds by 50 to 500.


And you need this to happen 8.7 million times—once for every species on Earth.


Each species needs:


  • Unique DNA (billions of base pairs in specific sequences)
  • Unique proteins (thousands per species, each requiring precise folding)
  • Unique organ systems (eyes, hearts, digestive systems)
  • Unique behaviors (mating rituals, hunting strategies, social structures)

This isn't one lottery win. It's 8.7 million lottery wins.




THE COMPARISON


Let's do the math.


Your absurd scenario:


  • Win three national lotteries simultaneously: 1 in 292 million × 1 in 302 million × 1 in 300 million = roughly 1 in 10^25
  • Get abducted by aliens: 1 in 10^11 (conservatively)
  • Have a 747 crash in your yard: 1 in 10^15
  • Combined odds: approximately 1 in 10^52

Evolution's scenario:


  • Creating functional DNA for one species: roughly 1 in 10^40,000 (conservative estimate)
  • Multiply by 8.7 million species
  • Account for multiple attempts needed due to hazards
  • Account for population requirements
  • Account for ecosystem integration (predators and prey evolving simultaneously)
  • Combined odds: approximately 1 in 10^8,700,000,000,000

Evolution is 10^8.7 trillion times less likely than your lottery/alien/plane scenario.


That means you winning three lotteries while being abducted by aliens while a 747 crashes in your yard is infinitely more probable than random processes creating all life on Earth.


So yes—go buy those lottery tickets. Your odds are stellar compared to evolution's.




TILTING AT WINDMILLS


In Cervantes' classic novel, Don Quixote charges at windmills, convinced they're giants. His squire, Sancho Panza, tries to explain: "Master, those aren't giants—they're windmills!" But Don Quixote won't listen. He charges anyway, gets knocked around, and blames "enchantment" for his failure.


It's tragic. It's comic. It's tragicomedy.


Evolutionists have been tilting at windmills for 150 years:


Windmill #1: "The missing links are out there—we just need to keep digging!"Reality: Billions of fossils found. Still no clear transitional forms.


Windmill #2: "Time will solve everything—just wait long enough!"Reality: Time destroys complexity. Check your expiration dates.


Windmill #3: "Mutations create new information!"Reality: Mutations delete or corrupt information 99.99% of the time. Never observed creating complex new features.


Windmill #4: "Natural selection explains everything!"Reality: Selection filters existing information. It doesn't create new information. You can't select for what doesn't exist yet.


Windmill #5: "Life arose naturally in a primordial soup!"Reality: 70+ years of trying to recreate it in labs with intelligent design has produced zero living cells.


Windmill #6: "DNA similarity proves common ancestry!"Reality: Humans share 50% DNA with bananas. Does that make us half-banana? Similarity can indicate common Designer, not just common ancestor.


The pattern is identical: See something ordinary. Interpret it through the evolutionary lens. Get knocked down by evidence. Blame "incomplete data" or "creationists." Charge again.


The rest of us—the Sancho Panzas of the world—keep trying to explain: "Those aren't giants. They're windmills. Look at them!"


But the academic Don Quixotes won't listen.




THE EXPENSIVE COMEDY


Here's the real tragedy: We're paying for this.


Universities charge $50,000+ per year to teach evolutionary biology. Four years equals $200,000+ for a degree. If you question the theory, you fail the course. If professors question it, they lose tenure. If researchers publish findings that contradict it, journals reject their papers.


This isn't education. It's indoctrination.


We're funding a tragicomedy—paying thousands of dollars per semester to watch professors tilt at windmills with straight faces, calling it "science," and punishing anyone who points out they're windmills.


The Apostle Paul described this 2,000 years ago: "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools" (Romans 1:22). People suppress the truth, exchange it for a lie, and then defend the lie with academic credentials and peer pressure.


The emperor has no clothes. And we're paying tuition to be told his wardrobe is magnificent.




THE ONLY LOGICAL ANSWER


So where did all these species come from?


Option 1: Random processes


  • Mathematically impossible (10^-trillions odds)
  • No evidence of transitional forms (no prototypes)
  • Contradicts observation (never seen one kind becoming another)
  • Violates thermodynamics (time destroys, doesn't create)
  • Requires information from non-intelligence (never observed)

Option 2: God created kinds


  • Genesis 1:21, 24-25: "God created... every living creature... according to their kinds"
  • Each kind with built-in variation (dogs can vary into wolves, poodles, dingoes—but stay dogs)
  • Clear boundaries (dogs can't become cats)
  • Sudden appearance in fossil record (Cambrian Explosion matches this)
  • Perfect execution from the start (no prototypes needed—Designer knows what works)
  • Information from Intelligence (matches all observation)

One option requires 8.7 million impossible miracles, coordinated across time and space, with no evidence.


One option requires one intelligent Creator.


Occam's Razor: Choose the simpler explanation.


"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1)


No lottery required. No aliens needed. No impossible odds. Just an intelligent, powerful, purposeful Creator doing what only intelligence can do: design.




THE CHALLENGE


The next time someone tells you evolution is "proven science," ask them three questions:


1. Where are the missing links?If trial and error happened over billions of years, we should have trillions of failed attempts fossilized. We have billions of fossils. Where are the prototypes? No prototypes means perfect first-try execution. And that requires a Designer.


2. Where did the information come from?DNA is code. Every code we've ever observed requires a coder. Mutations corrupt code—they don't write new programs. So where did the original programming come from?


3. What are the odds?If my lottery/alien/plane scenario is absurd at 1 in 10^52, how is evolution rational at 1 in 10^8.7 trillion?


Then watch them appeal to "time" or "experts" or "consensus."


But none of those change the math.None of those change the evidence.None of those change the logic.


The windmills are still windmills, no matter how many Don Quixotes charge at them.




Don Quixote eventually came to his senses on his deathbed. He finally admitted: "I was mad. I see clearly now."


One day, evolutionary biology will have the same moment of clarity.


The windmills will stop looking like giants.The missing links will stop being "just around the corner."The impossible odds will stop being ignored.


And someone will finally say: "We were wrong. It was design all along."


Until that day, the academic Don Quixotes will keep charging.The windmills will keep spinning.And Genesis 1:1 will keep being true.


"In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth."


Not windmills.Not giants.Not random processes.


Just God.
May Jesus fill us with his love and wisdom.

You sound like you could be a microbiologist. I have a few friends of mine that are. Something that's interesting about microbiologist, they are scientists and they are not accepted by the scientific community.

I already know why it is, it is because in microbiology they can prove the theory of evolution to be false. The theory of evolution is that the smaller organism becoming the larger organism becomes more complex. That the smaller organism is like an amoeba and very simple and the larger the organism is the more complex it becomes. There are a few problems with this Theory though. The first problem is that there's too much structure. The theory of evolution has to do with chaotic behavior of cells. So it doesn't make any sense that if I cut my thumb, that it would heal and remain my thumb. With the theory of evolution if I cut my thumb I might have a ear growing out of the wound because your cell structure would be chaotic.

But the more unique flaws and evolution have to do with the fact that the smaller you go the more complex it gets. As they keep trying to go smaller and smaller with their technology it used to be the microscope and then it was the electric microscope and then now they got some other crazy stuff that goes even further they can see the cell structure of rocks I think in some of that stuff. But what I'm saying is that even those really small items are more complex than they previously imagined. And the super collider in Europe discovered that they don't know, that they've discovered that there are more parts to the atom than they previously understood.

And then of course the one thing that really confounds those who don't believe in God is that everything has structure everything has ordered to it. Remember what I said about chaos that Evolution requires chaos. And the deeper they go and understanding cell structure it's still orderly it's still has structure.

Even the DNA the molecules that make up the body. They have structure to them, and even though sometimes those structures are a little flawed which gives us each of us our own little personalities. Which makes things like one person to be autistic for instance and another person seems more normal. But everything has structure. And the other thing is about DNA it doesn't change. The DNA from humans 3,000 years ago is still DNA for humans and the DNA for Apes doesn't work with humans
 
Back
Top