Why We Believe in Creation not in Evolution
by Fred John Meldau
A MILLION VOICES - From the Universe, the earth, the atom, from numberless specialized organs and odd creatures on land, in the air and in the sea, and from the body and mind of man - bear witness for God and Creation!
FORWARD
READING THE MANUSCRIPT of this book was a pleasant chore, involving a surprise. It was soon apparent that here was a "must" book for this troubled, confused hour - a volume seemingly specifically "come to the kingdom for such an hour as this."
This volume is of strategic importance to millions who seek sound knowledge, and evidence honestly interpreted. Evolution is given a head-on challenge, and should indeed be challenged ere millions of students and laymen accept the fraudulent speculation. The dangerously antichrist hypothesis should be most searchingly evaluated before it is accepted. It is being accepted by many as a basis for scientific socialism, secularism, atheism, communism, moral relativism, collectivism, materialism, scientific humanism, and related "isms." For evolution and naturalism to supplant supernaturalism and creative Omniscience will be at a bitter cost.
Thinkers who would like to locate quickly, ammunition against what they feel is a totally untenable theory, will find this book a comprehensive, well-stocked arsenal. (And, incidentally, one strikingly free of such errors as are sometimes found in writings by superficial students of so profound and vast a subject).
The widespread discovery of TRUTH in the area in which this book deals has a vital bearing on the number one problem of our century: What is man, and whence came he? And the even more important question, Is the Nazarene a "made-over ape" or is He the Son of God as He said - the Saviour of the world, God manifest in the flesh - the One who can lead us into God's kingdom of immortality?
References to supernaturalism (to creationism or "creatology") now approach the state of being one hundred percent blacked out in our schools, while most science teachers and writers jet-whoosh ahead on all fronts with a teaching directly opposite to the teaching of Scripture. It is no more than fair - basically right - that "the other side" of so vital an issue also should be given to our young people!
Do algae, amebas, worms, and so on up to apes and men "evolve higher" or do they not? Could it be true, as we sincerely believe, that each living thing stays in its kind - or dies? This book gives a convincing answer; and we may well believe that its position and material will be up-to-date for years to come. The reader will judge which "side" uses the best reason. Let us decide with truth - and so avoid possible treason before God!
Signed,
Leroy Victor Cleveland, Th.B., Ed.M., Ed.D., (Hon)
Secretary, USA Division, Evolution Protest Movement,
Canterbury, Conn.
INTRODUCTION
The famous Rufus Choate once engaged in a legal battle with the more famous Daniel Webster. The case depended on whether or not two wagon wheels belonged to the same axle on the same wagon. Choate advanced a brilliant argument, based on the theory of the "fixation of points," that the wheels came from the same axle. He had the jury almost convinced. Then Daniel Webster took the stand. He asked that the wheels and the axle be brought forward. It was evident they did not come from the same axle, for they were not the same size. To the honest and sensible jury Mr. Webster simply said, "Look at those wheels, gentlemen, just look at them, and see for yourself that they did not, they could not, come from the same axle and wagon." That was all the argument he advanced. The fact was evident; and the jurymen were moved by the facts - and he won the case. If judged by the FACTS in the case, evolution hasn't a chance!
Our American jury system is based on the premise that the average man or woman, though not himself an expert, can decide an issue when evidence is presented to him. We will report facts in this book, knowing that the average person can come to the right decision when facts are presented.
Many professionals are easily fooled. Consider the case of the practical jokers in Paris who tied a brush to a donkey's tail and made him swish it on a canvas within reach. A clever and ambiguous title was given it - and the "picture" was duly accepted by an art committee for exhibition!
For forty years the world of scientists was fooled by the so-called "Piltdown Man," "discovered" by Charles Dawson in the south of England and long called "Eoanthropus" (dawn man), and reputed to be from 100,000 to 500,000 years old! The Smithsonian Institution of Washington gives details of the deception in "The Great Piltdown Hoax."
Careful "detective" work done by Dr. J. S. Weiner, and others, revealed that "the lower jaw and the canine tooth are actually those of a modern anthropoid ape, deliberately altered (filed down) so as to resemble fossil specimens." The faker had cunningly "fossilized" the jaw and teeth by staining them a mahogany color with an iron salt and bichromate!
If "experts" and "scientists" can be fooled so easily by a faked surrealistic painting, or a fraudulent fossil, will they not do as badly in trying to interpret the whole history of creation from bones, fossils and unproven theories?
Many of us prefer to believe the record of the divinely inspired Scriptures that assures us that "God created" the heavens and the earth, man, and all living things. All the evidence supports the Bible record; so we are intellectually compelled to stand on the Scriptural position.
Evolution or Creation
Evolutionists and Creationists both realize that the theory of Evolution and the teaching that God created all things are mutually exclusive. Years ago Sir Arthur Keith said,
"Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable." Others have voiced the same opinion.
Huxley declared, "It is clear that the doctrine of evolution is directly antagonistic to that of Creation. . . . Evolution, if consistently accepted, makes it impossible to believe the Bible."
If Evolution Is True the Bible is False
If evolution is true, not only is the Bible mistaken in its teachings that GOD CREATED all things, but also the doctrines of the Bible rest on a foundation of sand and must collapse. H. G. Wells sums up the situation in these pointed words:
"If all animals and man evolved. . . . then there were no first parents, no Eden, no Fall. And if there had been no Fall, then the entire historic fabric of Christianity - the story of the first sin and the reason for an atonement - collapsed like a house of cards." ("Outline of History")
But if the Bible is true - and we are absolutely certain it is - then evolution is merely the vain imaginings of biased men, men determined they will not believe in a Supreme Being, but ready to believe any kind of theory that might be a possible substitute for the evident fact of creation.
Evolutionists Are Now Gloating
With characteristic cocksureness, the authors (Linville, Kelly and Cleave) of the textbook "General Zoology," write, "All scientists at the present time agree that evolution is a fact."
Julian Huxley (grandson of Thomas Huxley, famous naturalist), an English biologist, boasts in his new book, Religion Without Revelation, that God has nothing left to do - all belief in His intervention in nature or human history having been debunked. Huxley infers that since sin and forgiveness are no longer real, God, he declares, has been forced to abdicate, "evacuating section after section of His kingdom." Huxley's actual words are: "Operationally, God is beginning to resemble, not a Ruler, but the last fading smile of a cosmic Cheshire cat. *
* A reference to the grinning cat in Dodgson's "Alice's Adventures in Wonderland," in which a grinning cat, in withdrawing from Alice's view, disappears so gradually that last of all to vanish is its grin.
Huxley, and more recent advocates of the "God is Dead" nonsense, and all other unbelievers who seek to drive God out of His own universe, will pay dearly for their folly.
What Evolutionists Are Aiming For
Thousands of American scientists are confirmed "scientific socialists," bent on bringing to eventual fruition their ideal of "scientific socialism." Communists know they do not have a chance to make America communist by means of a frontal attack on our ideology. But they also know they have a very good chance of bringing in communism through the back door of state socialism, and that is what they are trying to do. **
**Khrushchev made a prediction sometime ago that "the U. S. will go socialistic." Many students of political trends think he is right. The only thing that can save America from such a national calamity is the presence of millions of BIBLE-BELIEVING CHRISTIANS in our good land, who believe God and believe His Word.
Believing they have won the battle of the mind in intellectual circles, because so many have accepted the philosophy of evolution, evolutionists are looking forward to "the next step in the evolution of man," the introduction of "societal organism." In this book, "Evolution and Human Destiny," Fred Kohler says evolution is leading us on to a "scientific" world state.
"The individual. . . . must always suffer death. For the species as a whole (the race). . . . it would appear probable that a new integration step will take place, leading to the formation of an entirely new organic entity - namely the societal organism." "This," he adds, "is proceeding at a surprisingly fast pace."
Then he injects this horrifying thought: "The further evolution of human society would be greatly affected by the development of a reproductive system operating on a societal level. . . . An entirely different situation would prevail were it possible to sire future humanity from the best fraction of a percent of the human race" (pp. 107-109).
So, many of the intellectual leaders of our nation are seeking to browbeat and brainwash "the common herd" into the acceptance of the theories of evolution, jelled into the political formula of state socialism. And they are willing to prostitute our "rugged individualism," rape the human mind, banish marriage, and force the public into a goose-step mentality that can be led into the totalitarian setup of their predicted "societal organism." This eventually will demolish the home and set up a materialistic state based on "scientific breeding" that will produce a loveless, godless, Christless race, each individual being a mere cog in the state machine and Huxley's "scientific humanism" will replace God and Christ.
Could it be that the disciples of evolution, living in a Gospel-enlightened land, have closed their minds to the truth to the point where God has sent them strong delusion "that they should believe a lie" because "they received not the love of the truth, that they may be saved"? (see 2 Thess. 2:11, 10). One thing we know: tens of thousands of scientists and intellectuals in our country have turned from the Living God to faith in the preposterous theory of evolution.
On the other hand, scores of noted scientists have witnessed against evolution.
Prof. Fleischman, modern zoologist of Erlangen after repudiating Darwinism, said, "The Darwinian theory of descent has not a single fact to confirm it in the realm of nature. It is not the result of scientific research, but purely the product of imagination."
The late Sir William Dawson, Canada's great geologist, said of evolution, "It is one of the strangest phenomena of humanity; it is utterly destitute of proof."
Such a great thinker as Dr. Robert A. Millikan, famous physicist and Nobel prize winner, said, "The pathetic thing is that we have scientists who are trying to prove evolution which no scientist can ever prove." (Dr. Millikan is an evolutionist; but he is honest enough to admit it is a theory that can NOT be proved).
Our Method of Presenting Proof
We plan to prove in this book that (1) the evidence shows that nature - inorganic and organic: the world around us - must be the work of an Almighty, All-Wise Creator; and (2) "Evolution" is an utterly inadequate answer to the facts of nature. By disproving "evolution" we help to establish the fact of creation; by establishing the fact of the creative work of God, we disprove evolution.
Acknowledgements and Dedication.
In a work of this kind, touching on scores of highly specialized fields of science, the author has had to seek the advice, criticism and suggestions of biologists and other scientists. He wishes to acknowledge his special indebtedness to Prof. Leroy Victor Cleveland, Canterbury, Conn., and Willard L. Henning, Dep't of Biology, Bryan College, Dayton, Tenn. Others gave unstintingly of their time and resources of knowledge to assist in the preparation of this work. The author, however, must take full responsibility for the final form of all statements in the book.
Dedication
We dedicate this book to two Christian business men - the late Lawrence Luce, Sr., of Fort Valley, Ga, and the late W.L. Hardin. Sr., of Atlanta. Ga. - whose financial assistance made possible its original publication.
CHAPTER 1.
THE CASE PRESENTED
"Development" and normal "growth" are not evolution. "Evolution" is often used to include the development and progress in inventions and industry, in such phrases as "the evolution of the telephone" or "the evolution of the automobile." The proper word to express such thoughts is "development."
Evolution Defined
Darwin defines organic evolution (p. 523, Origin of Species) as "the belief that all animals and plants are descended from some one . . . primordial form."
Commenting on the views of Lamarck, Darwin approvingly said, "He upholds the doctrine that all species, including man, are descended from other species . . . all change in the organic world being the result of (natural) law and not of miraculous interposition."
The LINE OF DESCENT from the lower to the higher forms of life is often given (with some variations) as follows: Protozoa - primitive metazoa - worms - fish - amphibians - reptiles - birds - mammals - man. Some recent Zoology textbooks (as Storer and Usinger) no longer refer to "a line of descent" but they speak of "specialized forms" that descended from some supposed ancestral lines (now non-existent) from which all present forms of animal life arose. This is a meaningless evasion - an alternate approach that solves no problems. But always, the transmutation from the lower form of life to the higher pre-supposes the gradual change by natural, resident forces, unaided by any external, supernatural intervention.*
*Many today hold to a modified theory of evolution - "Theistic evolution." It is based on the assumption that the higher plants and animals developed from lower forms of life, and that this was God's way of creating all higher forms of life, including man. This we are convinced is not in accord with either the facts of nature or Scripture, hence must be rejected.
The Bible Teaching Set Forth
The Bible clearly teaches that God created the heavens and the earth, and all forms of life on earth, including man. He created plants and animals in various "kinds" (families and genera) and gave each "kind" the power to reproduce, but only "after its kind."* (See Genesis 1:11, 12, 21, 25, 26-27).
* The Hebrew word used in Genesis 1 for "create" is bara and infers Divine power. The Hebrew word for "kind" is min and obviously refers to a related group capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. It corresponds more to our word "genera" than "species" for some "species" according to recent classifications, do interbreed, with fertile offspring.
The statement that life as created by God should "bring forth after its kind" does not preclude the bringing forth of a great variety of that kind. For example, we have the canine "kind" in which are the related dogs (of many varieties), foxes, wolves, and hyenas.
Unfortunately, much confusion has resulted from the use of the word "evolution" to denote mere improvement of a species, or the development of new "varieties" within the species. Obviously, there are many "varieties" within each species - but to develop new varieties is definitely NOT evolution. Evolution teaches the change, or transmutation, via a generally slow, gradual process of mutation, of one genus into another, the lower into the higher. It does NOT refer merely to the "improvement" of a species. The controversy then is NOT over the "improvement" of a species by interbreeding, nor the development of different "varieties" within the species, but over the evolution of a NEW genus or "kind," the new developing from the old, the higher from the lower.
"Species" Defined
Although there are some exceptions to the rule, the usual definition for "species" is that it is a population (a closely related group of animals or plants) which interbreed and produce fertile offspring." **
** See p. 4, "Evolution in the Genus Drosophila," Patterson and Stone; p. 120, "Systematics and the Origin of Species," Mayr; p.122, "Readings in Evolution, Genetics and Eugenics," Prof. H. H. Newman, University of Chicago Press.
According to this definition of "species" given by many scientists, the fertility of the offspring is proof that the parents were of the same species. Without change of species there can be no evolution - and without fertility there can be no descendants! Populations of different "kinds" (using the Bible word) will NOT interbreed - hence there are no offspring; and sometimes there are offspring of distinctly related "species" in which the offspring, like the mule, are sterile. The Creator has so made life that it interbreeds only in closely related species or genera; and as soon as interbreeding is attempted between more distantly related species or genera, the offspring is sterile and an impassable roadblock is put up so that it becomes impossible for one genus to transmute into another!
We now are ready to give a brief statement which is a key phrase that explains the operations and limitations of the divinely-given law of life, first revealed in Genesis 1. In nature we find endless variety within the species or genera; but absolutely NO CHANGE from one genus to another. Summed up, the laws governing all life prove there are:
"MUTATIONS" BUT NO "TRANSMUTATIONS" *
* Geneticists usually call this "macromutations."
by which we mean that there are many varieties within any group, but there can never be one "kind" of life (genus) mutating (changing) into another.
We now call attention to three fundamentally important facts:
(1) Practically all species exist in great variety. (2) The generally recognized phyla (major groups) of life are static; there is no evidence whatever of change from one phylum to another by evolutionary processes. (3) Practically all so-called "proofs" of evolution offered by evolutionists are merely "mutants," variants, minor changes within the same species.
Let us now examine evidence for these three facts:
(1) Practically all Species exist in great variety. Variety is the law of the Creator. In trees, no two leaves are exactly alike; in humans, no two fingerprints are identical; not even two snowflakes, out of the trillions that have fallen, are alike.
As we know, species are divided into sub-species, varieties, strains, races, breeds. In the dog species well over 100 distinct breeds of dogs are recognized - but who ever heard of a dog changing into another "kind" of animal? We see then many "horizontal" differences, but no "vertical" changes from one genus into another.
In fact "all animals and plants mutate," so scientific breeders can produce cattle without horns, white turkeys, seedless grapefruit, and many other varieties seemingly superior to the original stock, but all within the limits of the original "kind." *
*In nature too we find the development of "varieties," though the process is usually much slower than when man does it. Flies in this country have wings; but the only flies to be found on the storm-swept island of Kerguelen, in the southern Indian Ocean, creep around without wings, or little stubby vestiges of wings - but they are still flies. Scores of similar phenomena can be recounted - but such variants induced by environment always stay within the confines of their own "kind."
We should note also that man has been able to hasten, in some instances, the process of breeding new varieties of animals and developing new varieties of plants by artificially producing mutants through the use of radiation, heat or chemicals. Mutations in barley and corn have been produced by X-raying seeds. But all such mutations remain in the same genus as the seeds that were treated. Mutations are almost always harmful.
In every realm of life the story is the same. More than 20,000 new species of protozoa have been discovered with the aid of the compound optical microscope.
There are "80,000 species of snails" - and they are all snails!
Even in such obvious forms as the tiger, many variations occur in nature. It is large and long-haired in some sections; smaller and shorter-haired in India; and very small in Sumatra.
In mankind we see the same phenomena: one species, Homo sapiens, with many races: and with no two individuals - not even identical twins - exactly alike! One writer points out there are usually '46 chromosomes in each adult cell, and these (not counting the variations possible through the interchange of the many genes in each chromosome) make possible 17 million combinations of human characteristics!"
(2) There has never - there can never - be any change by evolutionary processes, from one "kind" (genus) to another.
In the countless billions of living organisms and dead fossils there has never been seen the slightest tendency to advance out of the confines of the original "kind" to which each organism belongs. On the contrary, there is found in every living creature the most stubborn determination not to evolve. This has been called "fixity of species" and is a commonly observed phenomenon. Here are a few of the many hundreds of competent scientists who bear witness to this fact.
Prof. Coultre, University of Chicago, said,
"The most fundamental objection to the theory of natural selection is that it cannot originate characters; it only selects among characters already existing." *
* This dictum is a truth of vast importance. "Natural selection" and "mutations" may slightly alter "characters" (organs; qualities) already existing, but they never introduce NEW "characters" - hence there are innumerable "mutations" and minor changes within the species, but there is no such thing as transformism from one genus to another.
Sir William Bateson, F. R. S., British naturalist who died in 1925, said, "We cannot see how the differentiation into species came about. 'Variations' of many kinds, often considerable, we witness, but no origin of species."
Georges Cuvier (1769-1832), French "dictator of biology" in Napoleonic times, firmly maintained the doctrine of the fixity of species. Since his death, no facts have been discovered that in any wise militate against the fundamental principle he stood for. Incidentally, France, to this day, has NOT accepted the theory of evolution with the zest this country has.
In recent times, Dr. Austin H. Clark, F. R. G. S., said: "The greatest groups of animals in life do not merge into another. They are and have been fixed from the beginning. . . . No animals are known even from the earliest rocks, which cannot at once be assigned to their proper phylum or major group. . . . A backboned animal is always unmistakably a backboned animal, a star-fish is always a star-fish, and an insect is always an insect, no matter whether we find it as a fossil or catch it alive at the present day. . . . If we are willing to accept the facts, we must believe that there were never such intermediates, . . . that these major groups, from the very first, bore the same relation to each other that they do at the present."
At a later date, when Dr. Clark (recognized as one of the world's greatest biologists) was biologist of the United States National Museum, he stated bluntly that Darwin, Lamarck and all their followers were wrong "on almost all vital points." "So far as concerns the major groups of animals, the creationists seem to have the better of the argument. There is not the slightest evidence that any of the major groups, arose from any other. Each is a special animal-complex. . . .Appearing as a distinct creation."
Richard Goldschmidt, Ph.D., erstwhile Professor of Zoology, University of California, says, "Geographic variation as a model of species formation" will not stand under thorough scientific investigation. "Darwin's theory of natural selection has never had any proof. . . .yet it has been universally accepted" (p. 211). "There may be wide diversification within the species. . . . but the gaps (between species) cannot be bridged. . . . Subspecies do not merge into the species either actually or ideally" (see pp. 138, 183, The Material Basis of Evolution; Yale University Press, 1940). He says, further, "Nowhere have the limits of (any) species been transgressed, and these limits are separated from the limits of the next good species by the unbridged gap, which also includes sterility" (p. 168, Ibid).
Prof. T. H. Morgan said, "Within the period of human history we do not know of a single instance of the transformation of one species into another." (p. 43. "Evolution and Adaptation;" McMillan, 1903).
Yves Delage, renowned biologist, said, "If one takes his stand on the exclusive ground of facts. . . . the formation of one species from another has not been demonstrated at all."
Darwin himself confessed, "Not one change of species into another is on record." "We cannot prove that a single species has been changed (into another)." (Vol. 1, p. 210; "My Life and Letters."
Without "transmutation" the theory of evolution is as devoid of proof as any other fairy tale.
(3) Practically all so-called "proofs" of "transmutation" (macromutations) offered by evolutionists are merely mutants, variants, minor changes within the sample species.
We have before us a half dozen articles in recent magazines that seek to offer "proof" of evolution; every one of them merely cites mutations made within the species. All such mutations are as commonplace as varieties of chickens and as meaningless. We quote from a few of them:
In the May, 1957 "Scientific American" is "A Study in the Evolution of Birds" by H. N. Southern. He calls attention to the fact that some guillemots have heads that are all black, and others, having white rings around their eyes, are called "bridled." He takes several pages to describe this phenomenon: "The frequency of the bridled character varied consistently with the latitude: at the southern end of the range, in Portugal, not a single speckled (bridled) guillemot was seen, but northward the proportion of bridled birds increased fairly regularly until it reached more than 50% in Iceland. . . . It was obvious that in some way the bridled trait, or something associated with it, conferred a considerable advantage in the northern part of the range" (p. 130).
We all know that "variations" in birds are as commonplace as the different breeds of pigeons.
In another article in the "Scientific American" on "Evolution Observed," by Francis J. Ryan, he states that though "almost nowhere in nature can we see evolution in action . . . we are now beginning to realize that objective in the laboratory. . . . With bacteria as subjects we have actually been able to observe evolution in progress." *
* He explains that though a human generation is 20 years, for bacteria a generation is only 20 minutes, so in two years bacteria can grow through "more generations than man has in a million years."
After admitting that "although bacteria will mutate, they are really remarkably stable," he said that they "obtained successively fitter and fitter types through 7,000 generations." They developed strains resistant to penicillin when the environment contained penicillin and strains resistant to streptomycin when the environment contained streptomycin! Every doctor in the land knows that bacteria soon become penicillin resistant, when penicillin is used repeatedly, but they still remain the same genus of bacteria as they were before!
Actually, all they demonstrated is the well-known fact that bacteria as well as other forms of plant life will mutate under different environments. But after their experiments these scientists still had BACTERIA! Such mutations, produced in bacteria, whether by man, or by nature, are no more proof of evolution than to assume that because one can breed yellow dogs and black dogs he can from them eventually breed tigers.
Darwin himself was deceived by a similar phenomenon: variations in 14 species of finches, and other animals, on the Galapagos Islands. "He reached the conclusion that since variation in individual characteristics existed among the members of any species, selection of some individuals and elimination of others must be the key to organic change." (See "Charles Darwin," Scientific American; also "Darwin's Finches," Scientific American). Since Darwin's time it has been abundantly proven that mutations and variants are confined to their "kind" and do NOT lead to transmutation.
A few years ago Life magazine had a series of articles on "Evolution." They too sought to demonstrate "evolution" by examples of what they termed "evolution through isolation" and "evolution through adaptation," which were nothing more than natural mutations. They gave the example of "five species of birds of Paradise" found in different locations in New Guinea. These five species had minor variations of color - but all were birds of Paradise! In seeking to prove "evolution through adaptation" they gave as an illustration the gray and brown lizards that live in the White Sands Desert. They were different colors - but both were still lizards. Let us remember that the law of life is: MUTATIONS (varieties in the species), but no transmutation from one "kind" (genus) to another - hence, there is no evolution!
The evidence proves the Bible teaching to be correct: though there are many varieties in each species yet each genus persists in breeding "after its kind," stubbornly refusing to do otherwise.
Both "natural selection," and "chance mutation" have been ruled out as possible explanations of the so-called "evolutionary process." Charles H. Hapgood presents these facts:
"It is still widely supposed that the principle of NATURAL SELECTION explains the origin of new forms of life. The truth is, on the contrary, that the impossibility of explaining evolution through natural selection, without the assistance of some other factor, became obvious to geneticists about the year 1900. Statistical studies by J. B. S. Haldane and others showed that the amount of time that would be required for new traits to become established in a series by natural selection alone was so immense that even whole geological periods would not suffice to produce new species. As a way out of the difficulty it was suggested that mutations might account for more rapid changes in life forms. It soon became evident, however, that the very great majority of all mutations, since they are random, must be harmful and will be eliminated, in due course, by the process of natural selection itself. The net result of mutations, therefore, must be to SLOW DOWN, rather than to accelerate, the process of evolution. The time element is by no means the only problem left unsolved by evolutionary theory. . . . " (The Earth's Shifting Crust, by Charles H. Hapgood, Saturday Evening Post, 1-10-'59).
So modern science has eliminated both Charles Darwin's theory of evolutionary changes through "natural selection," and the more recent theory of comparatively rapid evolutionary advances through "mutations."
SURVIVAL OF THE UNFIT
John R. Howitt, M. D., London, England says: "I would like to point out that the theory of Evolution is accepted by faith alone, for three-quarters of the record is missing and the gaps in the remaining portion are unbridgeable. The modern concept of Neo-Darwinism is based upon the occurrence of mutations plus natural selection. But as mutations are almost invariably inferior to the original stock this would constitute the Survival of the Unfit, whether in the usual habitat of the species or in an unusual one. And selection could only select, and never initiate any new characteristics. Neo-Darwinism illustrated the almost unbelievable extent to which scientists have been forced to retire in order to maintain the hopeless, materialistic theory of Evolution. As Arthur N. Field has pointed out, evolution is based 'upon belief in the reality of the unseen: belief in the fossils that cannot be produced, belief in the embryological evidence that does not exist, belief in the breeding experiments that refuse to come off.' " (Quoted in, Karl Marx as an Evolutionist).
Chapter 2
STRANGE CREATURES
That Witness Against Evolution
THIS IS A STRANGE WORLD, with many creatures in it that seem to come out of some unreal, imaginary land; in fact, some are so incredible that one would not accept them as real did he not know they exist. It reminds one of the man who, seeing an elephant for the first time, said, "Why, there ain't no such animal!"
These strange creatures, who live on land and in the sea, are a most powerful witness for the Creator. Let us call up some of these "witnesses" and hear their intriguing story.
(1) The Portuguese "Man-of-war" (Physalis). We quote from a recent magazine article.
"The ruthless Physalia employs a lethal combination of ingenius tackle, murderous chemical warfare and a remarkable working partnership with a small fish, the Nomeus.
"The deadly sequence starts as this innocent-looking little Nomeus swims about, apparently aimlessly, in the vicinity of the man-of-war. A bigger fish, seeing this tempting and seemingly defenseless morsel, makes a grab for it. The Nomeus darts away with an unexpected burst of speed, straight toward a tangle of seaweed-like tentacles that hang down from the man-of-war. The larger fish plunges recklessly after it, into these harmless-looking streamers. In a fraction of a second he is paralyzed and the fiendish tentacles are drawing him in to be consumed by the hungry man-of-war.
"What happened to him as he plunged into the streamers is a process that astounds and mystifies scientists who consider it one of nature's deadliest mechanisms. The tentacles are studded with tiny pear-shaped capsules. Sheathed in each capsule is a compressed hair. The instant any creature touches one of the capsules, this hair shoots out like a harpoon, its sharp point penetrating the body of the victim. Through the hair flows a powerful acid which has the power to paralyze the creature into which it is thus injected. . . . So great is the force of the driven threads that they can easily puncture human skin. When they do, the victim may be doubled up in violent spasms and enter a state of shock.
"But why do these deadly hairs, which respond so instantly and savagely to the slightest touch by other creatures, let Nomeus go unscathed? Actually, the Nomeus can be harmed by the Physalia's sting. . . . But the Nomeus seems to be especially adapted for dogging the tentacles of the Physalia.
"When the man-of-war captures and eats a fish which the Nomeus has lured into his trap, the little decoy fish gets the scraps from the man-of-war's meal." (Coronet). *
* In the March, 1960 "Scientific American" is an article by Charles E. Lane on "The Portuguese Man-Of-War," giving these and other facts about this "Colorful jellyfish . . .whose stinging cells on the tentacles with which it fishes secrete a substance that is almost as toxic as Cobra venom."
Such highly technical equipment that is so involved, can not be duplicated by man, and such an ingenious stratagem of luring other fish to kill them for food could NOT be developed by mere chance. It is the work of a Master Mind who apparently delights to create numberless, insoluble mysteries in nature and distribute strange abilities to equally strange creatures - all the work of His Mind and Hand.
(2) Sea Cucumbers. Sea cucumbers are fleshly "echinoderms" that creep about on ocean floors. They have odd rows of "tube feet" by which they attach themselves to rocks.
Two most unusual means of self preservation granted to these humble creatures by the Creator are given here (reproduced from a scientific article).
"When attacked, some sea cucumbers throw out their viscera, leaving them for the enemy, meanwhile escaping and regenerating a new set. Others throw out slime threads which entangle the enemy. The animals creep about on the ocean floor by muscular movements of the body wall. The tube feet are little used. The animals swallow sand or mud and digest the organic material. . . . They are used in making a soup."
Not evolution, but God gifted the lowly sea cucumber with the ability to disgorge its insides - and then manufacture new ones at its leisure.
We would like to know, if evolution made this startling feat possible for the sea cucumber, why do not all other animals in the same category, and higher, have the same ability? Obviously, such miracles in nature are the work of a Supreme intelligent Creator.
(3) The Case of the Moving Left Eye
There are so many marvels in sea life that we will have to give a separate chapter to "Fish Wonders." However, we want now to tell of the miracle of the "moving eye." Let us take the "plaice" as an example - though any flat fish will do. We refer to the Pleuronectidae, i.e., fishes that swim on their sides.
"On emerging from the egg the young plaice, almost microscopic and quite transparent except for its black pinpoint of eyes, is an ordinary round fish with eyes in the position of those of other round fishes, swimming around like a round fish. But after a month a strange thing happens; the left eye begins to move. Meanwhile, the body slowly flattens sideways and the baby fish, a surface swimmer so far, begins to sink slowly towards the bottom. The left eye is still gradually moving, and by six weeks has reached the top of the head. A week later it has gone right around and has almost reached the right eye. By now the young plaice has sunk to the bottom and is lying on what was its left side, but which from now on will be its underpart - the white side - and the two eyes are close together on what is now the top of the head" (The Living Sea, pp. 153, 154).
With plaice, soles, dabs, flounders and halibuts it is always the left side that goes down and the left eye that moves; these are called "dextral fishes." But with other species (like the turbot and brill), called "sinistral fishes," the reverse flattening process takes place, and in these fishes it is the right eye that travels toward the left eye and away from the right side on which they lie.
No one knows WHY, but it is always the same eye in the same genus that does the travelling.
Moreover, many of these fish possess "homochromic mimicry" - the ability to change their color to suit their surroundings, as a protective measure - to an amazing degree.
They become the same color as their surroundings; and if the color of their surroundings is changed, the fish soon takes on that new color!
Evolution has no adequate explanation of this phenomenon. The truth is, this is one of those many cases in nature in which the new-born of the species has an entirely different environment from the adult form, and so God performed a miracle when He made these fish so that they could live both as round fish in infancy, near the surface, and as flat fish, in adult life, at the bottom of the sea. Common sense tells us, the only answer to such an unusual arrangement in nature is, God made it so.
Actually, there are myriads of STRANGE PLANTS and ANIMALS having characteristics that to the superficial observer seem to be "without rhyme or reason," that can not be accounted for by blind evolution, but show the handiwork of an intelligent Designer and Creator. We mention a few more of the innumerable oddities:
The "RAILROAD WORM" of South America has a red light on it's head and 11 pairs of greenish yellow lights on its sides, which make it look like a train. WHY this strange arrangement? The only possible answer is, God made it so!
The CHINA-MARK MOTH, exquisitely decorated, spends its entire caterpillar stage under water. This is so drastically contrary to usual experience that there can be no possible "evolutionary chain" leading up to it or departing therefrom. WHY does this creature have this strange life cycle? No one knows; but the answer is, God made it so!
An ALGERIAN LOCUST is able to use its own blood as a weapon. It can shoot, like an accomplished Texas gunman, literally "from the hip." There is a pore between the first and second joints at the base of the leg. This pore can be opened when danger threatens, and a blistering stream of locust blood ejected to a distance of 20 inches! Why do other locusts not have this strange power - if evolution did the job? Obviously, the creature was designed, made that way.
Not to be outdone, the BOMBARDIER BEETLE * squirts from its hind end a reddish acid fluid which explodes with a pop. As the 'shot' comes into contact with the air it dissolves into a cloud of bluish smoke which, hovering like a gas barrage, covers the beetle's retreat. The gas has irritant properties and generally succeeds in putting the enemy to "flight" (Nature Parade, p. 122). This is ingenuity so involved, using knowledge of engineering and chemistry so advanced, that man can not duplicate this miracle! It demands creation.
* There is another article on "The Bombardier Beetle" by Dr. Kofahi later in the book.
There is a species of BLIND TERMITES that shoot to kill. They have a bi-lobed gland on the head which contains a fluid that solidifies on being exposed to the air. Although this termite is blind, it possesses a mysterious sense of direction which enables it to fire its lethal syringe as accurately as if it could see. "This termite discharges his 'jet' right in the face of an invading ant - and the ants that receive the fatal douche run about as if demented, . . . and they usually die" (Sir J. Arthur Thompson). Certainly such uncanny ability can not be attributed to mere chance.
Let us give credit to whom credit is due: God designed and created all life in nature!
Chapter 3.
OUR PLANET:
A Witness to Creative Design
"The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth" (Proverbs 3:19)
"The earth was fitted for man, and man was fitted for the earth." This is so evident, when one considers the facts, as to be axiomatic. The question arises, could a world that shows such marvelous evidence of design "just happen" - or does the fact of "design for an intended purpose" prove Divine creation? We say unhesitatingly, "it would be easier for a blind monkey in a dark room to pick up individual letters from a jumbled mass of type" and assemble Shakespeare's "Hamlet" than for the innumerable miracles in creation just to happen.
If one footprint on the sand convinced Robinson Crusoe that a person was on his island, then by the same logic we know that a Creator made the world, because He left, as it were, the countless footprints of His activities.
When Moses wrote the Pentateuch, the Hindus held this view about the earth in relationship to the Universe: "the earth is borne by four elephants standing on a tortoise's back" (quoted from Flammarion's Astronomical Myths). How different from such childish nonsense is the declaration of Scripture:
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" (Genesis 1:1). The same Bible tells us in simple, non-technical language, that "He (God) . . . . hangeth the earth upon nothing" (Job 26:7). We all know this is exactly the truth!
How can one explain the simple yet profound teachings of Moses and Job, save on the ground that they spoke "by inspiration of God?"
Scientists have advanced many theories about the origin of the earth - and not one of them is accepted as a logical explanation today! Against every theory advanced by man, some scientist has advanced facts to prove that theory wrong. So, they conclude, "We must honestly admit that we do not know how the earth and the other planets came into being." For example, the two best known theories of the origin of our solar system are: (1) Immanuel Kant's and Laplace's Nebular Hypothesis, and (2) The Planetesimal Theory, advanced by Buffon, Sir James Jeans and others. Scientists say concerning the first of these theories,
"We now know that a rotating mass of nebulous gas would not throw off rings" (Popular Science). "Since the days of Laplace, we have found out that if a ring of gas were thrown off from a spinning nebula, it would break up into many small pieces and these would never come together and join into making a planet - as the Nebular Hypothesis teaches. If the planets had been born that way, then the sun would be the fastest spinning object in the whole solar system. Actually, it is the slowest" (Adapted from E. V. McLoughlin).
Concerning the second theory, the same authority says,
"Unfortunately, astronomers and physicists have had to discard this Planetesimal Theory (that ages ago a large star came near our son and pulled off from the sun 'tidal waves of hot gases' that followed the whirling motions of the sun and became the planets. The second star later went off at a tangent, leaving our sun with its planets). First of all, we find it impossible to explain by the Planetesimal Theory how the planets got so far away from the sun. They would all be much closer to the sun than the earth is, if the theory were true. But there is a more serious difficulty: We cannot figure out how those 'tidal waves' of hot gases ever could have liquefied and later become solid rock. These original gases would have been so hot they would almost immediately have run off into space, and would never have had a chance to turn into drops of liquid or solid rock." (Adapted from the Book of Knowledge. See Vol. 1, pp. 133-136).
The Strange Phenomena of "Phoebe" and the Rings of Saturn
To remind the reader of the many difficulties involved creating an acceptable theory as to the origin of the earth, we call attention to the "Rings" of Saturn and to Saturn's moon "Phoebe."
One of the most spectacular sights in the heavens is Saturn and its three broad, flat "rings," as seen through a large telescope. These "rings" are not flaming and fiery, as was formerly supposed, but it has been discovered with the aid of the spectroscope that they are composed of "countless millions of tiny cold, dark bodies," tiny moonlets if you please, each shining by the reflected light of the sun.
Saturn has nine moons. Phoebe (8,000,000 miles from Saturn, and almost a billion miles from the sun), most remote of the nine, revolves around Saturn in retrograde motion, in the opposite direction to that of the other eight. *
* All of the five moons of Uranus revolve around their planet with retrograde motion. Neptune has two moons, one of which is retrograde in motion. Strangest of all: Jupiter has twelve moons, and FOUR OF THEM (those numbered 8, 9, 11 and 12) TRAVEL BACKWARD, or with retrograde motion, in their orbits, contrary to the usual direction of rotation and revolution of the planets and their moons. Why eight of Jupiter's moons should revolve one way and four in the opposite direction is "one of the unsolved mysteries of astronomy."
Who but a versatile and Almighty and Sovereign Creator could make a system like our solar system that works perfectly despite the fact that part of its "machinery" is apparently going the wrong direction?
Here is another question that theorists find hard to answer: Why has not Saturn drawn these trillions of tiny pieces of matter to its surface? In three tiers the rings surround Saturn with a tiara of glory - but WHY they are there and how they got there, no man on earth knows. And they are there despite the fact that some theorists say they shouldn't be there! And they most certainly would NOT be there if the Nebular Hypothesis or the Planetesimal Theory were correct.
Is There Life on the Other Planets?
All of the planets, except Mars, are immediately ruled out as possibilities because they are either too far away - hence too cold - or too close to the sun - hence too hot. Then too, they are either too small or too large, and so have either too little or no atmosphere, or have a poisonous atmosphere of the heavier gases.
Some believe that life on Mars, however, is a distinct possibility. But note these facts: Mars is 142,000,000 miles from the sun. Astronomers took a close-up look at Mars in 1954, when it approached to within 63,000,000 miles of our earth. They were convinced no human life exists there. Dr. Gerard P. Kuiper, director of McDonald Observatory (Mt. Locke Texas), said:
"Human life on Mars is entirely out of the question because of the severe night temperature and because there is not enough oxygen in the air." Editor's note: The amount of oxygen on Mars is infinitesimally small - only about one-fourth of one per cent per unit of volume as is in the air on our earth.
"The temperature on Mars ranges from a little above freezing at the equator during the day to about -90 degrees F. at night. Hence there is no liquid water on Mars; hence, no oceans or lakes."
Dean B. McLaughlin, University of Michigan astronomy professor, says "the dark markings on Mars' red surface are drifts of volcanic ash, and not vegetation," as has been long conjectured by many. He says this volcanic ash "in the dry, oxygen-poor atmosphere of Mars, is green rather than brown as on earth." *
* The facts about Mars are so well established, the question is no longer subject to controversy. Patrick Moore, in his book, A Guide to the Planets, says, "The earth is unique because it is the only world in the solar system upon which we could survive."
The Bible says, "God created the heaven and the EARTH." As we have seen, the earth is unique in our solar system - and as far as we know from science, it is unique in the entire universe. This can be accounted for on no other ground than that it was CREATED by an Intelligent, all-powerful God. And it was created for a specific purpose: that it might be a suitable dwelling place for mankind.
"Extraordinary Combinations" on Earth
When one considers "the extraordinary combinations of important characteristics that made the earth exactly what it is," one marvels at the ingenuity and the carefulness of the Architect.
The MASS and SIZE of the earth are just right. If the earth were 9,500 miles in diameter instead of the 8,000 that it is, it would double the weight of the air. With twice as much oxygen, the amount of water would be greatly increased; so much so that the entire surface would be covered with an ocean.
If the earth were much lighter than it is, its gravatational pull would be less, so that it would not be able to hold as much air as we now have. The lighter gases would escape first and heavier gases, like carbon dioxide, would remain, so the combination of gases in the air would be affected as well as its volume and density - and life as we know it would no longer be possible on earth. Conditions on earth would approximate those on the moon.
Dr. Wallace estimated that if the mass of our earth were only one-fourth less then it is (i.e. if its diameter were 7,200 miles instead of 8,000), almost the whole earth, due to a lessening of its atmospheric mantle, would be reduced to "a snow and ice-clad waste." As a matter of fact, Dr. Wallace more than half a century ago concluded "there is evidence of design" in the size of our earth. He proved that if there were a variation of only 10 per cent, either in the increase or decrease of the size of our world, no life on earth would be possible!
The earth is just THE RIGHT DISTANCE from the sun, relative to the amount of heat and light the sun pours into space. If the earth were much closer, it would be too hot; If it were much farther away, it would be too cold.
Dr. William J. Humphreys, formerly with the United States weather bureau told the American Meteorological Society that if the average temperature of the earth were raised but two or three degrees "you could bid goodbye to all the big cities of the earth," for the glaciers would melt and that in turn would raise the mean level of the oceans 150 feet. This would also inundate thousands of square miles of our most fertile lands.
If the average mean annual temperature were only a few degrees colder, vast amounts of moisture would be put in cold storage in the arctic regions, so robbing the oceans of much of their water. The result would be greatly increased desert areas of the world.
The Earth's Tilt and Rotation Are Just Right
The earth's axis, which now points toward the North Star, is tilted just right - at the strange angle of 23 degrees from the perpendicular, that is, in relation to the plane of its orbit. Because of this tilt the sun appears to go north in the summer and south in the winter, giving us four seasons in the temperate zone. For the same reason, there is "twice as much of the land area of the earth that can be cultivated and inhabited as there would be if the sun were always over the equator, with no change of seasons." Think what would happen if the earth were tilted any other way than it is.
If the earth had been tilted as much as 45 degrees instead of what it is, temperate zones would have torrid zone heat in the summer and frigid zone cold in the winter. On the other hand, if the axis of the earth were vertical to the plane of its orbit, January and July would have the same climate and ice would accumulate until much of the continents would be ice-covered six months and flooded the other six months. If the axis of the earth were horizontal to the plane of its orbit there would result "a crazy jumble of fierce heat and deadly cold," with prolonged nights on half the earth and prolonged days on the other.
The earth ROTATES at just the right speed, making a complete revolution every twenty-four hours in its trip around the sun. The result is, the earth's crust is evenly heated like a chicken on a turning spit. Were our day a year long, as it is on Mercury, * there would be scorching heat on one side, and bitter cold on the other.
* Mercury's period of rotation on its axis is about the same as its period of revolution around the sun, eighty-eight days, making the day the same length as the year! Consequently, the same side of Mercury is always turned toward the sun. That side is extremely hot, with a calculated temperature of about 770 degrees F. The side which is always turned away from the sun is forever dark and cold, with a temperature approaching absolute zero. If SUCH a condition prevailed on earth, there could of course be no life on this planet.
If our day of 24 hours were longer or shorter, all present balanced adjustments would be upset, and life on earth would become intolerable, if not utterly impossible,
The speed of rotation of the earth and its inclination on its axis of 23 degrees do NOT come under any law of the universe - they are just made that way, because it was best for God's intended purpose for the earth. The other planets and satellites do not have the same speed, nor do any of them have the same inclination as the earth.
The Sun in Relation to the Earth
The SUN, 93,000,000 miles away, is a MIRACLE of the first magnitude. It is exactly the right distance from us to do as God intended for it to do; provide us with light, heat, power, and many other blessings. It is the power of the sun that lifts the water from the oceans in the form of vapor, and so makes possible the rainfall over the continents. It is the power and heat of the sun that drives the winds of the world that in turn carry the rain clouds over the lands. It is the mysterious power of photosynthesis - a process not fully understood to this day - that enables plants to manufacture organic food from carbon dioxide, water, mineral slats and SUNSHINE. Animals live on this organic food, manufactured by the plants.
Herschel told us what would happen if the sun were suddenly extinguished.
"In three days from the extinction of the sun there would, in all probability, not be a vestige of animal or vegetable life on the globe. . . . The first forty-eight hours would suffice to precipitate every atom of moisture from the air in deluges of rain and piles of snow, and from that moment would set in a universal frost such as Siberia or the highest peak of the Himalayas never felt - a temperature of between two and three hundred degrees below zero."
The mystery of the sun's unfailing stability. Despite the fact that the sun gives forth such vast amounts of power, of which we on earth get but a comparatively infinitesmal amount, the sun does NOT burn out or lessen or change its output. Who feeds the sun? What mysterious power keeps it going? The recent explanation is, "nuclear transmutation," but even nuclear fission or nuclear fusion, or a combination of both, consume POWER, and matter - and so the sun should run down. Fred Hoyle in his book "The Nature of the Universe" discusses this problem. He says,
"But is nuclear transmutation taking place in the Sun nevertheless? . . . Energy generation must indeed be taking place inside the Sun, and at such a rate as to compensate for what is being radiated into surrounding space. . . . How then can the astrophysicist explain why the Sun does not collapse and why it has remained pretty much its present size, as the geologists have shown, over at least the last 5000,000,000 years?" (pp. 37, 34).
Hoyle suggests (following Eddington) that the sun keeps its same approximate size and a uniform temperature by "nuclear transmutation," despite the fact it is slowly running down - a sort of self-balancing system that keeps the heat and light and power radiating from the sun at a more or less uniform level. He suggests that in a long time - possibly ten billion years - the sun will burn itself out and explode.
This is extremely interesting. It confronts us with this marvelous fact: the Sun IS a self-regulating furnace that consumes unbelievable amounts of ENERGY - and yet it stays stable year in and year out. It is like the burning bush that was not consumed that attracted Moses. It is both mystifying and marvelous.
The Christian finds his answer to this problem in the Bible. God created all things in, by and through Christ. It is Christ who sustains the Sun! *
* This answer will not, of course, satisfy the scientist who leaves God out and accepts only a natural explanation for the facts of a physical universe. We have no controversy with honest researchers who seek to discover the physical laws and reasons behind all natural phenomena; nevertheless, the universe is so full of MYSTERIES and unsolved problems that through sheer force of FACTS we are driven to the conclusion that a Supreme Being, whom the Bible reveals, not only created the Universe, but also keeps it going. True faith is not inconsistent with the facts of science. On the other hand, the sheer logic of FACTS forces us to acknowledge the Creator.
"Who (i.e. Christ) is the image of the invisible God. . . . For by Him were all things created. . . . all things were created by Him and for Him: and He is before all things, and by Him ALL THINGS CONSIST (are held together)" (Colossians 1:15-17).
More Intricate Analysis of the Sun's Rays
The sun's rays are MIRACLES that science seeks to explain. When we ask what light is, we face a problem that has baffled the wisest, most learned scientists for generations - and still does. The ancient Greeks thought that light consisted of minute particles radiating from the sun. The physicists of fifty years ago theorized that light was "a series of waves in an all-pervasive material called ether." Today, the "electro-magnetic theory" is advocated, and light is regarded as "waves, or bunches of particles." So the current theory combines "particles" and "waves." "Photons (the energy released when an electron jumps from one orbit into another) get together in bunches and form 'electro-magnetic waves,' which are light." (Article in "Science Illustrated," on "What is Light?"). Understand the theory? Don't worry; no one else does either. That light from the sun could travel 93,000,000 miles at 186,280 miles per second, and reach us in a perfect state, as true light, is a miracle that none less than an infinite Creator can achieve!
But light is but one of many MYSTERIOUS FORCES coming from the sun! In recent years the theory that light, heat and radio waves are all "electromagnetic radiations" has won acceptance. We know that there are also other kinds of "electromagnetic radiations."
"The sum total of these radiations forms what is called a complete electromagnetic spectrum. Arranged in the order of increasing wave lengths, the radiations in this spectrum include gamma rays, X-rays, ultra-violet rays, visible light (from violet to red), infrared (heat) rays and radio waves. They all have the velocity of light - 186,280 miles per second; they differ only in wave length, and accordingly, in frequency."
Another authority says, "Ether wave vibrations of a frequency of 3,000 billion to 800,000 billion per second cause us to experience the sensation of radiant heat. Vibrations ranging from 400,000 billion to 800,000 billion per second, falling on our retina, cause us to experience light and color. Certain electric waves below 3,000 billion vibrations per second are not sensed, nor are the ultraviolet and X-rays, which are caused by the inconceivably rapid vibrations in ether, amounting to 800,000 billion to 6,000,000 billion per second!"
Confirmation of the "electromagnetic radiations" theory has come in the last few years.
"Between us and the sun there is a daily traffic of radiation as familiar and predictable as tomorrow's sunrise. Less familiar, and much harder to explain, is the fact that across that vast distance the sun bombards us not only with light and heat, but also with streams of electrified particles of its own substance. Although we cannot see or feel them, they have astonishing effects upon the atmosphere of the earth." (Condensed from "Corpuscles from the Sun," by Walter Orr Roberts, Scientific American).
To try to explain SUCH UNBELIEVABLE PHENOMENA as coming to pass as the result of "fortuitous circumstances" or "mere chance" is the height of absurdity; such wonders are the work of a supreme Creator.
Because of these "electromagnetic waves" coming from the sun, we not only have Light, and Heat, and Power, but all the modern miracles of radio, television, radar, X-ray, and a hundred other achievements of modern science that have revolutionized our lives since the turn of the century.
The Moon and the Tides Are Just Right
If the moon were half as far away, or twice its present diameter, great tides would wreck most of our harbors, periodically submerge low-laying islands and coastal plains, and drive inland a hundred miles on some rivers. If the moon were smaller and farther away, it would not have sufficient pull on our tides to cleanse our harbours or adequately rejuvenate (with oxygen) the waters of our oceans.
Obviously, Divine wisdom is shown in the creation of the Moon as a servant of the earth.
Those who visit our seashores are fascinated by the rhythmic pounding of the breakers against the rocky coast and the resulting splash and spray with each incoming breaker. This rhythmic "breathing" - for such it truly is - is very important to the life of the sea. All animal life in the oceans must have oxygen. The breakers, activated in part by the pull of the tides, aerate the water, giving it a new supply of oxygen.
Both the sun and the moon affect the tides. As a matter of fact, both the sun and the moon create "tides" in the atmosphere as well as in the oceans! And this ebb and flow of gravitational pull helps circulate the air in our atmosphere.
"Far over our heads daily moon tides heave and billow on the bosom of our ocean of air" (Sydney Chapman, in "Tides in the Atmosphere," Scientific American).
The Miracle of Our Atmosphere
To make the world habitable for man, it needs (1) a regular and sufficient supply of light and heat (which we get from the sun); (2) an abundant and general distribution of water; (3) an atmosphere of proper density and composition.
We have exactly the right kind of atmosphere - and the fact that we do have it is a MIRACLE! Our atmosphere is made up largely of nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (21%). In addition, our atmosphere contains an essential amount of argon, carbon dioxide and water vapor, beside traces of these gases: neon, helium, methane, krypton, xenon, hydrogen, ozone and a few others. Now here is the miracle:
"The signal fact is," says Helmut E. Landsberg, writing in the August, 1953, Scientific American, "that the rare gases are present in our atmosphere in only small amounts, MUCH SMALLER THAN THOSE KNOWN ELSEWHERE IN THE UNIVERSE. At the same time, oxygen, nitrogen, carbon dioxide and water vapor are present on earth IN MUCH GREATER ABUNDANCE than elsewhere." Mr. Landsberg reminds us of the source of his information. "The relative distribution of the elements in the universe has been determined by spectroscopic analysis of solar and stellar matter and by chemical analysis of meteorites" (p. 83).
If the ingredients of our atmosphere followed the proportions prevalent in the Universe life on earth would be impossible. It is clear, Divine Intelligence designed our atmosphere and Divine power executed the plan.
The Miracle of Self-Adjustment
Mr. Landsberg further states,
"During the past billion years this atmosphere has probably been essentially in a state of equilibrium. Production and consumption of the various gases balance. The major producer in the process is the volcanoes; the big flywheels are plants and the oceans" (Ibid).
The omniscient God, knowing what conditions would prevail on the earth when man entered the industrial era, created the world so that its atmosphere would be self-regulating. Here is one problem and its solution:
Although 180 billion tons of carbon dioxide gas have been released into the atmosphere by the burning of mined fuel during the last fifty years. . . .and during the next 100 years, the increasing use of fossil fuels in our world-wide industrial civilization should result in the production of about 1,700 billion more tons of carbon dioxide, yet the end result will not be injurious to man because "well over ninety per cent of any excess carbon dioxide introduced into the atmosphere eventually finds its way into the ocean, being readily dissolved by the ocean water" (Dr. Robert E. Wilson).
There are other means in nature to keep the "balance" of the atmosphere as God created it. For example, plants use carbon dioxide gas in the process of photosynthesis - and that helps keep down an excess of carbon dioxide gas.
The Miraculous "Nitrogen Cycle"
About 78% of the atmosphere is nitrogen and 21% oxygen. Nitrogen is an important constituent of plant and animal life - but they are unable to extract nitrogen directly from the atmosphere. Scientists call the bacteria that capture and fix nitrogen in the soil, so that plants can absorb it, "nitrogen fixers." These minute organisms then act as "middlemen" between free nitrogen in the air and the plants and animals who are unable to absorb directly from the air the nitrogen they need. It is good that the Creator made nitrogen an inactive (inert) gas. * Had it been otherwise, the world long ago would have ended in catastrophe.
* "It is amazing to know that nitrogen SHOULD be much more active, chemically than it is. Nitrogen's thermodynamic relations indicate that it has the potentiality of being MUCH MORE ACTIVE than it ordinarily is" (Martin D. Kamen, Scientific American).
"It is fortunate that nitrogen is chemically inert. If it were less reluctant to combine with other elements IT MIGHT READILY COMBINE WITH WATER TO FORM NITRIC ACID. . . .and then the oceans would turn into diluted nitric acid - a catastrophe certainly as horrible as any visualized in speculations about atomic warfare" (Martin D. Kamen, "Discoveries in Nitrogen Fixation," Scientific American).
An error in making even one gas would have made the world uninhabitable! The Creator is the perfect Chemist; all His works are perfect. The evidences for Divine Design in the world are overwhelming.
The vital place that nitrogen fixation holds in the world is seen in this striking quotation from Mr. Kamen:
"Nature's nitrogen cycle is as important to us as the carbon cycle of photosynthesis, by which plants recapture carbon dioxide from the air and convert the carbon into organic compounds. The nitrogen fixers and the photosynthetic organisms, linked in a majestic partnership, keep the living economy of the world solvent."
Lightning has a vital role in replacing nitrogen in the soul. "One hundred million tons of usable plant food a year are supplied to the soil by lightning. Nitrogen and oxygen are combined by lightning into plant food." (Farmers Digest).
This is another testimony to this great fact: God not only created the world in wisdom, He made it self-supporting; nature is so adjusted that it keeps itself in BALANCE. The fact that the earth is "self-adjusting" is an awe-inspiring wonder.
The Miracle of Oxygen
Oxygen, which constitutes 21% of the atmosphere is essential to all life. It is in the air in exactly the right proportion. *
* Evidence that oxygen is in the air in exactly the right amount is seen in the tragic experiences of many hospitals a few years ago. In giving premature babies extra oxygen, they gave too much - and hundreds of babies were blinded. For several months doctors did not know the cause. Eventually they discovered the blindness was due to too much oxygen given the babies in the incubators.
"We may almost say that the more chemistry and mineralogy we know, the more puzzled we are about the oxygen in the air. For, the more common rocks of the world contain so large a proportion of oxygen, that it makes up nearly half their weight. This is true of granite, sandstone, limestone. . . .and clay. The wonder is that any free oxygen is left over for the air" (Forethought in Creation, p. 14).
Nitrogen is inert; oxygen is overly active: and yet the Creator designed the world in creation so that there was just the right amount of oxygen as well as nitrogen.
The Atmosphere Has Just the Right Density
Obviously, the Creator, knowing all laws of His Universe, made the atmosphere at JUST THE RIGHT DENSITY at the surface of the earth. How do we know? It has been discovered recently that while
"the temperature eight miles up is a frigid 67 degrees below zero, it becomes a scorching 170 above at an altitude of 30 miles up" (Joseph Kaplan, in "The Air Above Us").
It is clear that if the atmosphere were rarified, life on earth would be impossible because of the extreme cold; if it were very rarified, life would be impossible because of the extreme heat.
What the Atmosphere Does for Us
In this brief treatise it would be manifestly impossible to list one one-thousandth of all things the atmosphere does for us, but we give a few to show Purpose in Creation. We are living at the bottom of a great ocean of air which not only provides us with life-giving oxygen, but also much more.
(1) The atmosphere shields us from the constant barrage of meteors that reach us from outer space. Hitting our atmosphere, most of them are burned up before they reach the earth.
(2) The atmosphere gives us a protective covering from the harmful effects of the ultra-violet rays from the sun. Dr. Florence E. Miller, scientist connected with the Smithsonian Institute, says that we live "miraculously" on this planet, protected from eight "killer rays" from the sun, by a thin layer of ozone high up in our atmosphere.
"If that little belt of ozone, approximately forty miles up and only one-eighth of an inch thick (if compressed), should suddenly drift into space, all life on earth would perish."
The whole subject of "ozone" in the air is so unusual, it seems almost incredible.
"There are two kinds of ultra-violet rays - long and short. The long are deadly, and are absorbed and neutralized by that ozone belt. If permitted to come through, they would blind and blister the human race, and would soon destroy all life on earth. The short violet rays, on the other hand, are necessary to life. If that belt of protective ozone were too thick, so that the short rays could not come through, we would all die of rickets.
"the most deadly of the 'eight killers' comes through in quantities just sufficient to render great service, without destroying us. It keeps down the growth of green algae, one-celled plants that grow in streams. Unrestricted, they would multiply so rapidly that they would clog all the streams of the world, and lead to endless flooding of the world. On the other hand, it is fortunate for the earth as we know it that the algae were allowed to develop in moderation."
Ozone itself is poisonous to human beings; but it is present in such a small amount and is so high up in the atmosphere (20 to 40 miles up) that it acts as a protective shield. Who can read such wonders in creation and not give glory to the God who made all things?
(3) The atmosphere is, moreover, a perfect blanket, an unfailing insulation against both heat and cold. It prevents the rapid escape of heat. Were it not for our atmosphere "we should be frozen as hard as a board every night" (Fred Hoyle in, "The Nature of the Universe"). It also acts as "a great reservoir and distributor" of heat. Dr. Wallace said,
"The atmosphere has the 'peculiar' property (most fortunate for us) of allowing the sun's rays to pass freely through to the earth which it warms, but acting like a blanket in preventing the rapid escape of the non-luminous heat so produced." Dr. Wallace points out the proof of this: When you get high enough in the tropics, you find snow lying on the ground all year round! (Quoted in "The Bible and Modern Science," p. 84).
(4) The atmosphere also provides us with a wonderful "night air glow." This is the light reflected to the surface of the earth from the upper atmosphere. "It amounts to about five times the total starlight falling on the earth." (Science Digest, Jan., 1953). While the sun is the great source of light, it needs the co-operation of the atmosphere to properly diffuse the light, both by day and by night; this is essential for the proper illumination of the earth.
"Dust" - a Witness for the Creator
The "witchery of the soft blue sky," to borrow a phrase from Wordsworth, has charmed people for ages past. Were it not for the DUST in the atmosphere the heavens would be black. "At 17 miles up the sky is always black, with only a luminous glow from below." To the presence of dust in the atmosphere we owe also our sunrise splendors, gorgeous sunsets and radiant afterglow.
The dust also is necessary to help form the rain drops. "Scientific investigation has shown that if there were no dust in the air, not a drop of rain or a snowflake would fall on the earth, and no clouds or fog would form." In view of this, it is interesting to read in the Bible:
"The clouds are the dust of His feet" (Nah. 1:3); and Proverbs 8:26 speaks of "the highest part of the dust of the world."
Conservative estimates show that star dust to the amount of 100,000 tons is filtering onto the earth yearly; and each day billions of tiny meteoric bodies invade the earth's atmosphere and are destroyed by friction.
So we see that every little part of creation is essential to the whole and has its necessary function in the Divine Plan.
Water: The Miracle of Nature
We all know that a world without water would be lifeless; but a world in which water followed the customary laws of physics would also soon become lifeless! Water has been aptly called "the most uncommon of the common substances." What a marvelously versatile substance water is! Its "molecules lock together in flinty embrace as ICE" - and think of all the uses of ice in our economy. In another form water covers the earth with a dry, protective blanket of SNOW in the winter, and piles up ton after ton of stored water in the valleys of the mountains. It falls as RAIN to quench the thirst of the dry earth in the spring and summer; it feeds our rivers and fills our oceans and lakes. It shades us from the heat of the sun as vapor in the CLOUDS. As STEAM it drives powerful machinery. Truly, water is one of the greatest gifts of God to man. Without water there could be no inhabited earth.
Water, unlike any other substance (except bismuth) is heaviest at 4 degrees centigrade - slightly above freezing. Above that and below that it is lighter. Because of this, ice floats and water freezes from the top down. If ice were heavier than water, instead of lighter, when a lake froze the ice would sink and the water would soon be solid ice from the bottom up. All rivers and lakes would freeze solid! This would kill all fish, prevent thawing in the spring and so upset the scheme of things as to make life on earth impossible. Who changed the law that cold contracts and heat expands, when it applies to water? The Creator designed it so.
Water has many other virtues that make it indispensable for a habitable earth. Water is nature's best "air-conditioner." Water has an immense capacity for storing heat energy. Thus, the oceans can absorb enough heat during summer to cool the air; and during winter this heat is given off, thus moderating the cold weather.
Then too, water is "the closest approach to a true universal solvent" that we know. It dissolves with ease a fantastic variety of materials; and yet it does NOT dissolve the rocks of the seashore, otherwise the continents would melt away and disappear in the oceans.
Though sea water weighs 800 times more than air, when it is vaporized by the heat of the sun it is lighter than air and is lifted into the clouds! This remarkable miracle makes rain possible. Did all these strange and wonderful characteristics of water "just happen"? Hardly. Water with all its marvelous characteristics is one of God's creations.
"And God said, "Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters." And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. (Genesis 1:6, 7).
Ages before the modern science of meteorology, the Bible revealed the "rain cycle."
"The wind. . . .whirleth about continually, and the wind returneth again according to his circuits. All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again" (Ecc. 1:6, 7).
Modern science describes this amazing rain cycle:
"The energy of the sun received on a square mile of ocean will evaporate and raise about 5,435 tons of water vapor into the air in an hour. Water vapor rises to considerable heights and moves with the air currents (over the continents). When the air holding water vapor cools, the vapor condenses into billions of tiny droplets, so small it takes about 8,000,000 to make a fair sized drop of rain! . . . Each of these tiny droplets must have a tiny particle of dust on which it clings. As this condensation takes place in the atmosphere, clouds are formed; when the air has been chilled sufficiently to form clouds these tiny droplets coalesce and form larger drops, and when the air can no longer support them, it rains." (Condensed from Science Digest).
The Miracle of the "Lightning-Nitrogen" Cycle
Few people realize it, but there is an almost constant discharge of electricity from the earth.
This electrical discharge, almost exclusively in fair weather, is not very strong. Over the whole globe at any one moment the total is only about 1,500 amperes and represents a continuous expenditure of energy at the rate of around 50,000 kilowatts. This 1,500-ampere discharge was first discovered in 1917. . . . After three years of study of the atmosphere over separated points Dr. Vannevar Bush reported that the current comes from the still air lying above the clouds of thunderstorms. The current there is going downward, instead of upward. And the amount of it that reaches the earth, over all the world, is estimated to total - what do you think? - 1,500 amperes! This cycle goes on steadily. The discharge that rises from the earth HELPS PRODUCE LIGHTNING. There are about 16,000,000 thunderstorms over the world every year. These thunderstorms, with the accompanying lightning, produce about 100,000 tons of nitrogen compounds annually, dropped into the soil thereby helping greatly to fertilize it!
And so the Creator uses the powers of lightning and the imperceptible discharge of electricity from both the earth and the clouds to create "Lighthing-Nitrogen" Cycle that does so much good to the soil!
We have Just the Right Number of Clouds
By the way - speaking of clouds, rain, thunderstorms and lightning, brings to mind this interesting fact: Our world has clouds, but not too many. The planet Venus "is covered entirely with a deep blanket of clouds that touch each other and seldom if ever break apart. Our world, on the other hand, averages one-half open sky when no clouds interfere with our sun's work" (George Leo Patterson). Blind unguided chance? Evolution? Oh no, the Living God made this adjustment in nature as well as all others that together make our world a habitable planet.
The Place of Rivers in the Rain Cycle
Every continent and all major islands are drained by rivers.
Africa has the Nile, Niger and Congo; in North America we have the St. Lawrence, Columbia, Colorado * and the Mississippi; South America has the Amazon and the Orinoco; Europe has the Rhine, the Rhone, the Danube and the Volga; Asia has the Yellow River, the Ganges, the ancient Tigris and Euphrates rivers, and many more.
* We can not help but mention how prone men are to suggest impossible theories and make preposterous statements. For example, in the article, "the Face of the Land" that appeared a few years ago in "Life" Magazine, the author said, "In the million years since man first evolved on the earth (?). . .
the Colorado River has carved out the Grand Canyon a mile deep, eight miles wide at the rim, in about the same period of time." This is utterly impossible. Engineers, in building the Boulder dam found a layer of large and small rocks - three to four feet thick in thickness - in the bottom of the Colorado River channel. This layer of loose rocks acts as a buffer and protects the actual hard, rock bottom of the river channel FROM ANY ABRASION WHATEVER! Century after century could pass WITHOUT THE COLORADO RIVER WEARING DOWN THE CHANNEL ONE INCH.
All of these rivers, with their tributaries, drain vast areas of the continents - and add greatly to the beauty and productivity and commerce of the world. Almost all the great cities of the world are on the seashore or on a river.
It is not hard for us to realize that these mighty rivers as they flow continuously toward the sea are "part of the cycle which goes on eternally and without which we could not exist. For this cycle assures us of an adequate supply of fresh water; and water is necessary for all living things - both animals and plants - as well as for the far-flung industries upon which our modern civilization is based."
The Place of Mountains in the "Rain Cycle"
"It is hardly an exaggeration to say that rivers could not exist if there were no mountains. . . .For one thing, the chill sides of mountains offer vast condensing surfaces where the clouds give up their moisture in the form of rain or snow. . . .Mountains also provide slopes and necessary elevation down which the water runs in its journey to the sea."
So the mountains become God's reservoirs to store moisture in the form of snow and ice until the warmth of spring thaws the ice and melts the snow and sends forth the water to the lowlands below - at the time of year when moisture is needed by the crops.
"the snow-laden summits of the Alps, the Himalayas and the Andes represent an enormous reserve, which is later made available for wide spread areas of the earth's surface" (Popular Science).
One is led to ask, "Who (but God ) hath measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, and meted out heaven with a span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance?" (Isaiah 40:12).
The Sublime Beauty of Snow
"A snowflake is one of God's most beautiful architectural marvels. Snowflakes are infinite in variety and beauty - the great majority being six-sided crystals, each geometrically perfect and differing from all others in design" (Dr. Arthur I. Brown).
Who can watch the myriads of snowflakes filter down through the winter skies, pile up in fleckless beauty, and not know that this is God's world? Such miracles as snow could not "just happen." No one but an infinite God could create trillions upon trillions of delicate snow flakes each winter, with NO TWO OF THEM IDENTICAL! That is a miracle of creative genius that should prove to the most skeptical that GOD is the Master Architect who made all things.
"If, through the centuries, snowflakes accumulated only one-half of one per cent FASTER than they melted, the water of the earth would eventually pile up in mountains of ice until. . . the earth at last gathered all the water of the earth in frozen embrace" (B. H. Shaddock, Ph. D).
If the sun were farther away or if the earth were smaller, and the atmosphere lighter, if the earth were tilted other then it is, if the mean temperature of the earth were a few degrees lower than it is, or even if water froze at a temperature a few degrees higher than it does - our intricately well-balanced world WOULD SOON PERISH IN THE THROES OF IRREMEDIABLE MALADJUSTMENT.
William O. Field, writing on "GLACIERS" in the Scientific American, said:
"Of the earth's total water budget not much more than 1 per cent is in the solid form of ice or snow, and far less than that in the form of water vapor in the atmosphere. Yet these proportions make up a delicate balance which is immensely important to life on earth. Any appreciable change in the ratios of water, ice and atmospheric moisture would have catastrophic consequences for man and his economy. The ice piled in glaciers on the lands, for instance, exercise a vital control over sea levels, climate and the continents' water supplies."
The Continuous Miracle of the "Soil Replenishing" Cycle
Pick up some loamy garden soil between the thumb and the forefinger. Within that thirtieth of an ounce of soil is a teeming world of living things - "almost as many microbes as there are human beings on earth," some two billion or so. These thousands of millions of micro-organisms in the soil are both plant and animal organisms. They are there as part of the Creator's ingenius system to keep the soil rejuvenated. One species will assist another in "breaking down complex compounds of dead organic matter to simpler substances," to become food for plant life.
The root systems of grasses and other plants help break down rock particles, the first step toward creating a new soil. As the roots spread through the soil, they deposit there nitrogen and other new substances built from air, sunlight and water. When the plant dies, it offers food to many organisms in the soil - and they then decompose the remains of roots, stems and leaves, so they can become food for succeeding generations of plants.
Earthworms, too, help in the manufacture of wholesome soil. They eat decomposing plants and soil, mixing and digesting the whole, casting it up on the surface. Earthworm castings not only bring soil up to the air and so help aerate the soil, and loosen it, but also the castings are a rich, rejuvenated soil
Is it not wonderful that, through the use of micro-organisms, earthworms, the root-system on plants, and certain fungi, God has established a self-perpetuating system of universal soil rejuvenation that keeps the soil fertile for its perennial crops? Such a wonderful and practical system could have been devised and put into operation only by an all-wise Creator,
The Blessing - and Menace - of Molds
Most of the approximately 100,000 species of fungi are scavengers; they grow upon the remains of dead plants and animals, and concert these into rich soil.
And so, year in and year out, this ceaseless activity goes on - and man is able to plant seeds year after year, and get crops.
There are enemies and dangers of course. Some fungi destroy flour, wood, leather and innumerable other products. They are especially active when the relative humidity of the air is from 70 to 75%. In equatorial regions where the humidity is high fungi do much damage. Here is a warning:
"Fungi have done fairly well at converting a major portion of this world into mold. Given a slight but consistent increase in temperature and relative humidity over a large portion of the globe. . . and they probably would become a dominant form of plant life" - destroying the complex life as we now know it. (Amazing Appetites of Molds).
Here again we see the perfect balance of God's world. IF THE RELATIVE HUMIDITY AND THE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE WERE INCREASED, THE WORLD AS WE KNOW IT WOULD SOON BE RUINED BY MOLDS!
The Miracle of the Stable Elements
God "doeth great things past finding out; yea, and wonders without number" (Job 9:9, 10).
The 100 or so elements on earth - from hydrogen to uranium and beyond - are just the right kind of elements for a habitable world, and are here in just the right amounts and in the right combinations. Comparatively small amounts of gold, silver and other precious metals, and the precious stones, are here for the use of man. Iron, copper, aluminium and other industrial metals are here in larger quantities, for they are needed by man in his industrial enterprises. Coal, oil and natural gas are hidden in the bowels of the earth (and yet they are near the surface), to be discovered and used by man when needed. Phosphorus, necessary to the organic world, would spread death and destruction, if it were here in too large quantity. The same is true of chlorine, fluorine, and other elements.
The continents must be made of rocks and mineral combinations not soluble by water (silicon, aluminium, magnesium and iron compounds) - and they are; otherwise all land would soon be carried away into the sea.
Without oxygen, there could be no water; without calcium, there could be no lime, no bones; without nitrogen, there could be no plant life - and so the story goes. There is definite need for EVERY ONE of the nearly 100 elements found in nature, in the intricate economy of this world and in the economy of man.
The elements unite into innumerable combinations - all with the infinite precision of absolute perfection. "No druggist's prescriptions are made up with the thousandth part of the accuracy with which nature works," for all chemical compounds unite in strict conformity to atomic valences. The water molecule consists of two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen. It is staggering what chemical combinations are possible. Consider the various resins, plastics, alcohols, carbohydrates, nitrates and phosphates. Consider what possibilities are latent in common things. George Washington Carver developed over 200 useful items peanuts; well over 200 medicines, dyes and synthetic products are made from coal; from the casein in skim milk are made such products as cloth, plastics, glue, buttons, paints, etc. Obviously, GOD made the elements for man, and as a challenge to man, that through research he might put to use all of the wealth of things God has put here.
Because these elements are constant and stable, the chemist can work with them with absolute assurance. There is no "evolution" in the elements; thank God there is not; all nature is reliable, stable.
"The properties of elements are to be regarded as fully determined from the earliest conceivable epoch, and are perfectly changeless in time" (L. J. Henderson, "The Order of Nature").
Could these approximately 100 elements create themselves? A man would be a fool to believe that. Creation demands a creator.
There are thousands of other amazing facts about the elements, such as unusual design exhibited in the "Periodic Table," and the orderliness and design in evidence in chemical combinations.
The Miracle and Mystery of the Seas
"The sea is His and He made it" (Psalms 95:5).
"From the beginning men have recognized the sea as a supreme wonder and paradox of the natural world - at once a thing of beauty and terror. . . . a source of life and a fearful and capricious destroyer" (The World We Live In - The Sea; Life Magazine).
We know of course that life on earth would be utterly impossible without an abundance of water. No oceans, no rain; no rain, no life. But when the Creator made the oceans, He really did a magnificent job. Nearly three-fourths of the earth's surface is covered with water that has an average depth of two miles! These oceans contain some "300 million cubic miles of water" that form an immense, life-packed and life-giving reservoir.
The first miracle, in the light of what the rest of the universe is like, is that there IS an ocean here!
"In the universe as a whole, liquid water of any kind 0151 sweet or salt - is an exotic rarity."
"Contrary to common belief, the liquid state is exceptional in nature; most matter in the universe seems to consist either of flaming gases, as in the stars. or frozen solids drifting in the abyss of space. Only within a hairline band of the immense temperature spectrum of the universe - ranging through millions of degrees - can water manifest itself as a liquid" (Life Magazine).
Scientists have wondered and theorized where all the water came from. Most scientists today tell you that the earth's water came from volcanoes - from water "sealed in the heart of the young planet from the beginning." (See, "The Earth Is Born," Life, Dec., 8, 1952). But how could it if the earth was originally a whirling mass of flame and fire, or a whirling mass of hydrogen gas, as many theorists claim?
"Most authorities agree that this first great flood (of water, coming from volcanoes) could NOT have filled the ocean basins as they are filled today, or indeed supplied much more than 20% of the water that now laps high on the continental ramparts" (Ibid *).
* We know that originally the entire world was covered with water (Gen.1:2). Furthermore, we know that oxygen is a VERY SCARCE ELEMENT IN THE UNIVERSE: so where did the earth get all the oxygen necessary to create so much water, in addition to the vast quantities of oxygen, in chemical compounds, in our rocks? God made it so.
WHO MADE THE OCEANS? The answer is, God made them. For an enlightening discussion of this, read Job 38:1-11.
Obviously, the very presence on our earth of such vast quantities of water is a special work of the Creator.
The second miracle, in view of the vast quantity of water there is on our earth, is that there is any land area at all! There is full evidence that at one or more times the entire earth was covered with water! (See Genesis 1:2; also Genesis 7). We know this because practically everywhere on earth may be found sedimentary rocks containing fossils from the sea. All land area of the earth was once "a part of the sea floor that happens now to be. . . sticking out."
All authorities admit,
"This planet is mostly sea, and there is nothing really to prevent it being ALL sea. A little natural levelling of the land would do so" (Living Sea).
Were we to level off completely the earth's present land surfaces (including the bottom of the oceans), the present continental masses would be about 1½ miles under water! Remember, only 29% of our earth is above water level - and if all the land now above sea were dumped into the depths of the oceans, it would fill only one-eighteenth of the present area of the oceans! Although the oceans average two miles in depth, the land area above water averages only ½ mile in height. How shall we account for this? The only possible explanation is the MIRACLE OF CREATIVE DESIGN! God made it so!
One authority says,
"Every ocean bed has long, narrow chasms where the bottom falls away AS THOUGH SOME TITANIC FORCE HAD SUCKED THE CRUST INWARD TOWARD THE EARTH'S CORE. Curiously, these great oceanic trenches appear near the continental slopes or along the edge of island arcs rather than in mid-ocean" ("The Miracle of the Sea," in Readers Digest).
The Bible tells us that "GOD (caused) the waters under the heaven to be gathered together unto one place, . . . and the dry land appeared" (Genesis 1:9).
One is reminded of the statement in Job 38:10-11, where the Lord told Job that He had established His decree "and said, Hitherto shalt thou come but no further, and here shall thy proud waves be stayed" (Margin Job 38:10, 11).
In view of these facts we ask, as the Lord Himself asked Job, WHO SHUT UP THE SEA WITH DOORS?" (Job 38:6).
The Amazing Wealth of the Seas
"Every cubic mile of sea water contains 100 million tons of common salt, six million tons of magnesium, and 4 million tons of potash." In addition to vast quantities of at least forty other elements, there are "7 tons of uranium and 5 grams of radium to the cubic mile." (The World of Water). . . ."and in a cubic mile of sea water there are about $93,000,000 in gold and $8,500,000 in silver" (Wealth from the Salt Seas).
"All commercial iodine was formerly obtained from seaweeds; and this (iodine) is perhaps the most mysterious of all substances in the sea." (Wealth From the Salt Seas).
"A monopoly of the world's bromine is held by the ocean, where 99% of it now occurs. The tiny fraction present in rocks was originally deposited there by the sea." * Today we extract thousands of tons of bromine from the sea and add it to our gasoline to make it "high test."
* So BROMINE becomes another silent but effectual witness for the Divine Creator. The fact that it is present ONLY in the oceans argues for the Divine creation of the seas - otherwise, if the ocean waters originally came up out of the bowels of the earth through volcanoes, WHY IS THERE NOT BROMINE IN THE EARTH?
We also get vast quantities of MAGNESIUM from the oceans. It is a strong, light-weight metal, used in the manufacture of airplanes.
"The ocean is the earth's greatest storehouse of minerals. In a single cubic mile of water there are about 166 million tons of dissolved mineral salts, and in all the oceans there are about 50 quadrillion tons!" (Wealth From The Salt Seas; Science Digest).
"According to the Dow Chemical Company, which alone manufactures 500 preparations from substances found in the oceans, each cubic mile of sea water stores 175 tons of dissolved chemicals worth FIVE BILLION DOLLARS!" (The Unknown Deep).
Obviously, God created the oceans to be of use to mankind.
Space forbids more than the mere mention of the enormous WEALTH mankind gets from fish and other edible creatures of the sea (crabs, lobsters, oysters, etc ). All combine to serve mankind, even as the Creator planned: for He made the earth and all that is in it for the benefit of mankind!
The Maintenance of Fresh Water Rivers and Lakes
Life as we know it must have FRESH WATER in great abundance, as well as the briny waters of the vast oceans. In the economy of God He solved this problem by keeping the water vapors that the sun lifts into the clouds FRESH, with no additional chemicals. So, when more than 24,000 cubic miles of rain descends each year over the continents, it is all fresh water with no other chemicals added. If there had been that one mistake of having the laws of nature such that the ocean waters as they are would have been lifted in vapor, then soon the land areas of the earth would be salty marshes on which no crops could grow!
Further Miracles and Mysteries of the Seas
The mysteries and miracles of the sea include such wonders as the fascinating Miracle of "protective coloring" for the fish of the sea. God is behind these wonders!
"Many surface fish, like the mackerel and the herring, are colored blue or mottled blue and green on top and silvery white beneath" because that is the color of the water as viewed from above - and the bottom corresponds to the color of the sands on the sea floor. "In the shallow waters near the shore fishes that live habitually among seaweed are striped and mottled" - to protect them from their enemies.
Consider the mystery of Migration in the Sea.
"The whale will travel thousands of miles between the food-rich waters of the polar seas and the warm breeding grounds near the tropics. Salmon travel hundreds of miles to return to the stream in which they were born. Eels from European rivers make a journey of 3,000 miles to the Sargasso Sea when they are ready to spawn. The tiny larvae, in their turn, set of on the long journey to the shores of Europe (where they have never been), taking several years for their marathon swim. There are no landmarks to guide them, yet these little creatures find their way unerringly through the monotonous vastness of the sea!" (The World of Water, p. 85).
It would take many volumes to describe that vast array of strange deep sea life in the canyons and lower depths of the ocean: odd fish with luminescent and electric light equipment, and a host of other wonders of the deep that live in lightless depths of a mile or more below the last glimmer of the sun.
The Marvelous Circulation of the Seas
To provide oxygen, and phosphates, to help keep the temperatures of the earth more equal, the Creator has made the seas with a most intricate system providing proper CIRCULATION. This circulation is the result of
"the waves and currents that cause continual movement in the waters of the sea; these are created by the wind and the weather and the rotation of the earth (called the Coriolis Effect). . . .also by the rhythmic movements of the tides."
"the forces that unite the oceans and keep them in reciprocal motion, agitating the depths, impelling warm waters to the frozen ends of the earth and cold water in return to the sunny tropics, are intricate and interlocking, but essentially they are three in number: the wind, the rotation of the earth and the changing density of the water. Climate, gravity, and the varying density of the salt water . . .have smaller parts in perpetuating the motion" (Life Magazine).
All of us are familiar with the vast ocean currents. Both the Atlantic and the Pacific currents "form clockwise and counterclockwise patterns." Among the most important of these vast ocean currents are the famous GULF STREAM (which keeps moving a volume of water equal to a thousand Mississippis at flood tide), the POLAR STREAM, the JAPANESE CURRENT, the BRAZIL CURRENT, the PERU CURRENT, and a score of other lesser known ocean currents!
Surely, this gives full evidence that Someone PLANNED it that way - to keep the oceans in proper balance as far as heat and cold are concerned, and to keep the minerals - especially phosphates - and oxygen in good supply.
The Three Amazing "Cycles" of the Oceans
In addition to the regular movements of water, there are at least three LIFE CYCLES in the oceans of more than passing interest. "In contemplating the intricate balance of these natural forces the mind is filled with deepest awe" (Miracle of the Sea).
The first amazing FOOD CYCLE, beginning with the "grass of the sea" - the plankton that grows in great abundance in the upper 250 feet of the sea waters.
This "pasture of the sea" can produce nearly twenty tons per acre during the year - several times the yield of crops taken from the soil! this so-called "plankton" (the primary source of food for the living things in the sea) is made up in part of algae, that grow profusely; these include the microscopic "diatoms" - minute plants. In the blanket of floating plankton are also myriads of tiny animals little bigger than the diatoms - animals such as radiolarians, foraminifera, tintinnids and minute animals called copepods, that feed on the little plant cells.
This "plankton" is food for the fish. Herring, sardines, mackerel and other small fish feed on it continuously. then larger fish, like salmon and tuna, feed on the herring and mackerel - and these in turn are devoured by sharks, seals and porpoises. One miracle about plankton we must mention is:
"Plankton. . .make daily migrations through depths of hundreds of feet as they adjust their environment to the light conditions they prefer" (The World of Water).
This is the Creator's very practical plan for serving fish that live at different levels their daily meal of plankton.
The second Cycle is the OXYGEN Cycle. All life in the sea breathes and lives on oxygen. ALL OXYGEN IN THE SEA MUST COME FROM THE SURFACE LAYER - about 250 feet deep. In this upper layer we find this miracle:
"The microscopic plants (in plankton, mentioned above) are busy at their work every moment of taking in carbon dioxide and giving out oxygen, by means of the process called photosynthesis, while at the surface itself atmospheric oxygen is taken into solution direct. What remains then is merely a matter of distribution. This is effected by currents and rises and falls of the water, due to the action of winds and waves. In effect, the sea is being continually stirred like soup in a saucepan" (The Living Sea; p. 214).
This is nothing less than a MIRACLE OF DIVINE DESIGN.
The third life Cycle id the astonishing PHOSPHATE CYCLE. Phosphorus is of great biological significance because it is vital to life. Most of earth's phosphorus is distributed as simple or complex phosphates. The cycle is stated for us in an article on "Phosphorus and Life," by D. O. Hopkins, printed in the 1952 "Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution."
"All igneous rocks contain phosphorus, mainly as an apatite, a complex form of calcium phosphate." Phosphates are now found in solution in the sea. "the initial assimilation of phosphate in the sea is largely made by algae (in the plankton)." This plankton is eaten by the fish. "A large proportion of sea life dies (a natural death), and their remains sink to lower depths; the eventual decomposition of this dead organic matter returns the phosphates to the (lower depths of) the sea. There is therefore in the lower water levels a steady building up of phosphates; (but) there are the REGULAR INVERSIONS OF THE UPPER AND LOWER LAYERS OF SEA WATER which result in the further utilization of deep-sea phosphate for plankton growth." "All the deep-sea fishing grounds are places where an exceptional uprising of bottom water takes place. With it, a supply of nutrients, particularly phosphate, is brought back to the sunlit zone of plankton growth."
So again the Creator has planned things to keep the economy of the earth - and the sea - solvent.
The EARTH - and all things therein: atmosphere, soil, oceans, rain, clouds, mountains, elements - becomes a vast and unified witness for GOD. Such intricate and involved MIRACLES prove not only CREATION but also the fact that the Creator made the earth a well-balanced and self sustaining and self-rejuvenating system. The humble heart cries out with the Psalmist:
"O Lord, how manifold are Thy works. In wisdom hast Thou made them all; the earth is FULL of Thy riches . ' (Psalms 104:24).
We have given scores of facts; hundreds more could be given. Enough has been presented to show that the world is NOT the result of "fortuitous chance." But we say with Dr. Paul Francis Kerr, noted mineralogist:
"I cannot believe that the facts of science are mere accidents. The more we study the earth, the more sense it makes. What I have studied about the earth has made me no less a believer in a Supreme Power, but actually more so. . . . We have seen so much of God's handiwork we can say, GOD MUST BE. "Honest thinkers must see, if they investigate, that only an infallible Mind could have adjusted our world and its life in its amazing intricacies."
It is as easy to believe that the Mona Lisa came into existence by stray bits of variously colored pigments being hurled through space that happened to hit a canvas now in the Louvre as to believe that this marvelous world came about by chance.
Chapter 4.
(1) The Witness of the UNIVERSE, and
(2) The Witness of the ATOM to the fact of Divine Creation; and
(3) The Unabridgeable Chasm Between the Non-living and Living.
"In the beginning GOD CREATED the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1).
1. THE WITNESS OF THE UNIVERSE
SINCE TIME IMMEMORIAL man has watched the night sky and wondered about the nature of the Universe of which his world is a part; but only in the last fifty years has he begun to understand the immense pattern of the heavens. We now know that our universe is not merely a universe of individual stars, but a universe of millions of "star systems" called "galaxies," similar to the Milky Way Galaxy of which our solar system is a part. As far as relative size is concerned, our earth now emerges as "a cosmic pebble circling a minor star in one of millions of enormous galaxies" rushing around in space that seems to be limitless. *
* SIZE itself is no adequate criterion of importance. The fact that ON EARTH ALONE, as far as astronomers are able to determine, exists INTELLIGENT LIFE, makes this comparatively small earth of vastly greater importance than immense, lifeless galaxies!
Such inconceivable vastness has elicited from men such expressions as "the cold, awful depths of space;" "our Milky Way Galaxy leaves our earth, by comparison, as a tiny speck of dust in New York's Grand Cental Station." **
** It is interesting that Isaiah uses a similar figure - comparing the nations of earth as "dust" to the God of the Universe. "Behold, the nations. . . .are counted as the small dust of the balance. . . .All nations before Him are as nothing; and they are counted to Him less than nothing." (Isaiah 40:15).
As we contemplate this vast universe, we are impressed with three outstanding facts;
(1) The inconceivable SIZE of the universe
(2) The presence of LAW in the universe, coupled with the demonstration of limitless POWER
(3) The continuous display of a surpassing GLORY
Each of these factors bears witness to A SUPREME BEING OF UNIMAGINABLE POWER, WISDOM AND GLORY!
(1) The Inconceivable SIZE of the Universe
Our sun, 93,000,000 miles away, is 866,000 miles in diameter - 1,300,000 times the volume of the earth. Betelguese, one of the stars in the constellation Orion, has a diameter of 215,000,000 miles - 248 times the diameter of our sun; Arcturus, one of the super-giant stars in our galaxy has 25,600 times the volume of our sun! Antares, a double star in the constellation of Scorpio, is said to have a diameter of about 400,000,000 miles - over FOUR times the distance from earth to our sun! In other words, Antares is so large that if it were a hollow ball, and our earth and sun were placed inside it, our earth could follow its orbit around the sun, and not even come half way to the outer edge of Antares! The largest star known in our galaxy is one of the stars of the binary (double) star Epsilon Aurigae, which is said to have a diameter ten times that of Betelguese, or 2,150,000,000 miles! Other supergiants in other galaxies are presumed to be still larger!
Job stood aghast at the greatness of God when he contemplated His universe. He said, "He is wise in heart and mighty in strength. . . . who alone S-P-R-E-A-D-E-T-H O-U-T the heavens. . . .who maketh Arcturus, Orion, and Pleiades." (Job 9:4-9).
Astronomers, as you know, measure stellar distances by the yardstick called a "light year" - the distance light will travel, going at the speed of approximately 186,000 miles per second, in a year. A light year is about six trillion miles (6,000,000,000,000). Arcturus, the great star in the constellation Bootes, is 241 trillion miles away - a distance so great, it would take light from Arcturus 40 years to reach our earth, while light from the other giant mentioned above, Betelguese, takes about 100 years to reach us! Our closest star, Alpha Centauri (it is really a binary, a double star) is about 25,000,000,000,000 miles away; and it takes its light 4 1/3 years to reach us.
Great as these distances are, they are almost insignificant in comparison with other distances astronomers speak of. We are told, "it takes light 100,000 years to travel from one edge of our galaxy to the other." Astronomers now estimate that with the 200-inch telescope on Mt. Palomar they will be able (with certain refinements they are now working on) "to reach out into space two billion light years!" Such distances are of course utterly incomprehensible by the human mind; they leave one awestruck.
We are further told that "our galaxy has a hundred billion (100,000,000,000) stars" (Scientific American magazine; Sept., 1956); and that there are, beyond our own Milky Way Galaxy, "at least a billion more galaxies, each having approximately as many stars in it as our galaxy" (see article by Jan H. Ort, Scientific American). *
* Some authorities place the estimated number of galaxies (star systems similar to our own Milky Way Galaxy) that lie far beyond our galaxy, at from 500 billion (Hubble) to a trillion - instead of a billion. One begins to wonder if they are not swept off their feet and are misled by some features of the universe that they do not as yet fully understand and so have misinterpreted - such as perhaps the so-called "curvature of light." But of this we are confident: The greater the universe, the greater is the God who made it! Nothing is beyond the power of an infinite God!
No man can even begin to give an accurate estimate of the number of stars in our universe. A noted astronomer (Jeans), when asked about how many stars there are in the universe, answered, "there must be as many as there are grains of sand on all the seashores of the world."
His statement brings to mind three Scriptures, written ages before the advent of modern telescopes, when men believed there were "about 3,000 stars."
"And He brought (Abraham) forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them" (Genesis 15:3).
then, in Genesis 22:17, we read these astonishing words that connect the number of stars with the sands of the seashore! "I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven and as the sand which is upon the sea shore."
The other Scripture is Jeremiah 33:22: "As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured . . . .".
Modern astronomers and the inspired prophets of the Bible agree on this point: the stars of the universe are as innumerable as the sands of the seashore! How could the writers of the Bible have known that the stars are as innumerable as the sands of the seashore, except by Divine Revelation? The same God who created the universe inspired the Bible.
The Andromeda Nebula, the nearest of the great outside spiral galaxies, is "at least two million light years from us" (George W. Gray), and it appears "to be larger than our own Milky Way Galaxy." Twenty million light years is about as far as the 200-inch telescope is able to resolve a nebula (galaxy) into individual stars. More astonishing yet is the assertion that "in the average region of space the average distance between galaxies is about three million light years." (Rudolph Minkowski; in Scientific American).
Such a vast universe bears testimony to the fact the God who made it is ALMIGHTY beyond all comprehension - truly OMNIPOTENT. If the creation of the "world" should impress men with the omnipotence of God, how much more the creation of the universe!
"For the invisible things of Him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead." (Romans 1:20).
Isaiah tells us that GOD is far greater than His universe; for the universe is called His "tent."
"To whom then will ye liken God? . . . Have ye not known? have ye not heard?. . . It is He that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that S-T-R-E-T-C-H-E-T-H O-U-T the heavens as a curtain, and S-P-R-E-A-D-E-T-H them out as a tent to dwell in. . . .Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these things, that bringeth out their HOST by number; He calleth them all by names by the greatness of His might, for that HE IS STRONG IN POWER; not one faileth." (Isaiah 40:18-26).
The Bible does not start by giving an argument for the existence of God, it simply introduces Him as the "Creator of the Heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1). Nothing could be more grand or majestic - or simple. Later in Scripture we are given the perfect argument for GOD in Hebrews 3:4:
"For every house is builded by some man; but He that built all things is God."
It is as simple as this: We all know when we see a house that someone had to build it; we all should know, from the same reasoning; that Someone who is Almighty had to build the greater "house," the universe.
One looks into the sky and asks, Where did all this vast system of stars come from? The atheist's answer is, matter is eternal, matter is indestructible. But the Christian's answer is: GOD alone is eternal, and He created matter. The creation of the atomic bomb gave proof to all that matter is NOT indestructible, but is really "congealed energy." When an atom bomb explodes, matter is turned into energy! If one insists that matter is eternal and was never created, he still faces the problem of where MOTION came from; who or what started the stars revolving around each other? What supplied the original terrific "push?" No matter how a thinker may try, eventually he is forced by sound logic back to GOD as the Original Cause of matter, motion and continuance of motion.
(2) The presence of LAW in the universe, coupled with the demonstration of unbelievable POWER
"By understanding hath He established the Heavens." (Proverbs 3:19).
The Universe is a marvelous, majestic, wellnigh infinite CLOCK, with "wheels within wheels" - to borrow a thought from the book of Ezekiel.
One writer speaks of "the great clock-work of the Universe." Another says,
"The heavens are orderly; the stars are not scattered helter-skelter for ever and ever. They are arranged in orderly systems called galaxies. . . . Any system, of course, has a shape. Our galaxy is shaped something like a pinwheel." (Astronomer, writing in the Denver Post).
Otto Struve, in "Surprising Facts About Stars," says,
"But in its very mysterious way, nature has created order in this disorder (what should be disorder).
And a writer in "Popular Science," writes an article on "Balancing the Heavens," in which he speaks of
"the apparently purposeful and deliberate movements of other heavenly bodies like the planets." He explains that "the movements of the stars and comets and meteors, as well as of the planets and the satellites of the planets, result from the uniform working of mechanical laws."
"BALANCING THE HEAVENS" - what a happy expression; and how true! The billions of stars, planets and their satellites are all BALANCED between the force of "gravitation" * and the law of "inertia," which states that "matter will persist in a state of rest, but when once it is put in motion, it tends to keep going at the same rate and in the same direction, unless acted upon by some external force."
* In the 17th Century Sir Isaac Newton discovered the principle of universal gravitation. "Gravitation" is one of the most mysterious of all forces - for it acts at a distance across vacant space. It seems wholly unreasonable to think that a body can "reach out across space and put hooks on another distant body and pull it toward itself." This is an utter mystery - and will ever remain so. "We do not know, nor can we ever expect to know, the mechanism of gravitation." (Science, Nov., 23, 1923). It is assuredly a LAW created by God. All law demands a LAWGIVER.
GRAVITATION pulls the stars toward their center or nucleus - and toward each other; INERTIA - after once the stars have been put in motion - keeps them in motion, and in a regular orbit determined by the pull of gravity. By the balance between two great laws of nature, we have the explanation of the ceaseless motion in orbits of the stars and every other heavenly body!
But the serious thinker at once asks two pertinent questions:
(a) What or Who STARTED all this motion? Where did the original "push" come from? Science has no answer. The Bible Believer has the perfect answer: the Creator gave the universe its original motion - and He is the One who keeps it going! Remember, the universe is NOT an absolute vacuum; there is scattered through space a small quantity of hydrogen gas, meteors, meteorites, and small particles. But be the matter ever so small, MATTER IN SPACE WILL IN TIME SLOW DOWN AND STOP ANY MOVING BODY. The finest pendulum ever made, in the most nearly perfect vacuum man can make, will neither START itself - nor keep going indefinitely.
(b) WHO keeps this vast machine going?
The man-made satellites require a tremendous "push" to get them 500 to 1,000 miles above the earth; but they gradually lose altitude and will eventually fall to earth. One of the fundamental maxims of the physical sciences is the Second Law of Thermodynamics: that is, there is a universal tendency to run down, a universal trend "toward randomness" and decline. On the average, things will get into disorder and run down if left to themselves. Obviously, Someone not only had to START this vast machine, but Someone also has to keep it going. Again, we are forced back to GOD. The fact is, if God should suddenly die - which is of course impossible - the universe would become chaotic in a very short time, even though it is running smoothly now, due to the truth of the Second Law of Thermodynamics: the universal tendency toward decay and decline.
The Bible presents the Triune God (Father, Son and Holy Spirit) as both the Creator and active Sustainer of the universe.
"For in Him (Christ) were all things created, in the heavens and upon the earth, things visible and things invisible. . . . ALL things have been created through Him, and unto Him; and He is before all things, and in Him all things consist (are held together)" (Col. 1:16, 17).
The heavens are not only "balanced" between the law of gravitation and the law of inertia, they also are balanced in a most amazing and vast and intricate array of revolving and inter-dependent systems, from our solar system on up to vast galaxies and systems of galaxies! *
* The amazing accuracy and smoothness with which the Universe revolves - as a flawless, perfect machine - can be seen in the perfection that characterizes the journey of our earth around the sun; It takes the earth "365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 48 seconds to make its journey around the sun; and in this circuit. . . .the earth has never varied one second in a thousand years." None but an infinite GOD could achieve such flawless, continuous PERFECTION.
Our earth revolves around its axis every twenty-four hours; once a year we spin around the sun, going over 500 million miles annually; our sun, carrying with it the entire planetary system, ** goes in an enormous orbit around the center of our galaxy, a trip that takes 230 million years! And it travels at 175 miles per second! The journey our sun takes is around the center of our galaxy that is 100,000 light years from one edge to the other. And now astronomers tell us that "we have evidence that our Milky Way Galaxy and those relatively near it form a distinct 'Galaxy of Galaxies' that might be called a supergalaxy." (Gerard de Vaucouleurs).
** In our planetary system, as we mentioned in our last chapter, our earth shows hundreds of evidences of DIVINE DESIGN - it was created to be a suitable habitation for mankind. In the rest of the universe both WATER and OXYGEN are very scarce; in fact, hydrogen and helium make up 99% of all matter in the universe. But on our earth we have a well balanced variety of about 100 elements, with a large amount of oxygen, that combine to make a practical "world" for man to dwell in. GOD MADE IT SO!
Writing of this supergalaxy, Gerard de Vaucouleurs says, in the July, 1954 Scientific American:
"This supergalaxy - a gigantic system of galaxies - appears to be a strangely flattened cluster perhaps 40 million light-years across. Its uncounted population of galaxies may run into tens of thousands. Its CENTRAL NUCLEUS is roughly marked by the well-known cluster of galaxies beyond Virgo (one of the 89 Constellations), some 15 million light-years away." (Cornell University).
"Surveys showed that galaxies tend to cluster in groups, containing up to a thousand or more. The exploration has in fact suggested to some that our own galaxy may be an outrider in a supergalaxy, just as the sun is an outrider in our galaxy." (Harold P. Robertson, in The Universe; Scientific American, Sept., 1956).
As a matter of fact, one student of astronomy advanced the theory, based on mathematical calculations, "that you can find the center of creation in the motions of 108 great galaxies." Be that as it may, there is beyond doubt a CENTER of the entire Universe, around which all galaxies and all super galactic systems revolve in an apparently endless procession of majestic grandeur!
From one vast center, one tremendous nucleus, the Almighty controls His universe! While many modern scientists ignore God, they do so at the expense of true logic and sound reasoning. A system as vast and as intricate and as involved and as orderly as our UNIVERSE demands not only a Supreme Architect, but also an Almighty Creator and an Omnipotent Superintendent to keep it going!
We have spoken of the law of GRAVITATION and the law of INERTIA. There are scores of other "laws" in the universe that are perfect and necessary to make up this vast universe. All students of astronomy are familiar with Kepler's three laws of planetary motion. There are "laws" of motion, laws of heat, laws of light, laws of sound - and all are PERFECT, never-changing, never-failing.
Rear Admiral D. V. Gallery (USN; writing in the Saturday Evening Post), said,
"The stars. . . .in their orbits and velocities through the heavens faithfully obey a great code of LAW. Earth's scientists can quote and explain this code in great detail - until you ask, "Whence came these laws?"
And scientists have FAITH in the laws of the universe. they predict the coming of comets into our solar system years before we see the comet - then they predict its return at some future date - and they do so unfailingly, because the laws of the Universe are unfailing!
Prof. Einstein said in The World As I See It:
"the scientists religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the Harmony of Natural Law, which reveals an Intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection." (p. 29).
Edwin B. Frost, at one time astronomer with the Yerkes Observatory, wrote:
"Everything that we learn from the observational point of view in the study of astronomy seems to me to point precisely and always toward a purposeful operation in nature. . . .
"I cannot imagine planets getting together and deciding under what law they should operate. NOR DO WE FIND ANYWHERE IN THE SOLAR OR STELLAR SYSTEM THE DEBRIS THAT WOULD NECESSARILY ACCUMULATE IF THE UNIVERSE HAD BEEN OPERATING AT RANDOM. . . .
"You cannot fail to recognize that LAW has been long at work when you examine the wonderful structure of the aspirals (the spiral-shaped galaxies).
"In a purposeful creation I find it not at all inconsistent to believe that there must be a Mind developing the purpose. . . . If the universe is purposeful, then it is plain to me that man, who is the highest form of development on this earth, must himself be distinctly a result of purpose rather than accident." (Quoted by Dr. Graebner, from the Chicago Tribune, July 13, 1931).
(3) The Continuous Display of a Surpassing GLORY
"The heavens declare the glory of God." (Psalms 19:1).
A look into the night sky is a fascinating sight; this inherent glory of the skies is greatly enhanced by the discoveries of modern astronomy. When viewed in a telescope, the color of stars becomes decidedly more pronounced; as a matter of fact, many stars glow with a brilliance more dazzling than a cut and polished gem. The difference in color in stars is due to their temperature. Very hot stars are blue-white or white; cooler ones are orange or red. Through the telescope many stars can be seen as green, orange, violet, pink and many other colors! It is a most inspiring spectacle!
Here are some more of the wonders of the heavens:
In the constellation Aquarius is "a magnificent globular cluster of stars like a swarm of glittering bees;" not far away (on a sky photograph) is "a lovely pale blue nebula."
The star Beta Orionis is a prodigious sun in Canes Venatici is seen (through the telescope) to be actually two great suns, one yellow and the other a gorgeous lilac.
As you know, stars are classified according to their brightness: the brighter being those of the first magnitude or less. Those which are just visible, without the aid of a telescope, are the sixth magnitude. A first magnitude star is 100 times as bright as one of the sixth magnitude. Stars of the twenty-second magnitude have been photographed by the larger telescopes. Think of what marvels are to be seen in a star cluster of 100,000 stars, each a pinpoint of glory on the photograph!
Star clusters and the nebulae are "the spectacular showpieces of heaven." One writer speaks of "the gorgeous diadem of resplendent suns forming the Pleiades."
Another wonder of the heavens is the so-called PULSATING STARS. There are thousands of them.
"No more curious spectacle is afforded by the heavens than that of a throng of seeming signal lights waxing and waning every few hours under the sway, obviously, of some common law, yet with no trace of unanimity, some fading while their neighbors are on the rise."
A star which is marked on the sky chart as Delta Cephei alternately brightens and dims with remarkable regularity. It takes five days and eight hours to pass from its brightest phase down to its faintest and then back to its brightest. Astronomers are unable to account for this phenomenon. There are thousands of such stars, called "cepheids" (since they appear to be the same general type as Delta Cephei), each having its own characteristic change in luminosity.
One writer, describing the "Wonderful Milky Way," waxes enthusiastic, and says,
"Our knowledge of star varieties, of the giant stars and dwarf stars, of the violet-white Sirian, and of all other kinds, and our knowledge of the marvelous movements, variations and systematic relations of stars, expand and deepen the GLORY AND MYSTERY OF THE HEAVENS. The sense of some vast, undiscovered plan comprehending the movements and relations of all is altogether in keeping with the sublimity with which the night sky impresses everyone. But when we review the attempts to construct this scheme we are baffled by a sense of their inadequacy and artificiality."
How true! Human attempts, outside of the pale of Divine Revelation, are completely "inadequate" to explain this glorious Universe! When we contemplate the marvels of the universe, we agree with Dr. Fitchett:
"It were as easy to believe that Milton's 'Paradise' were set up in all its stately march of balanced syllables by an ape, or that the letters composing it had been blown together by a whirlwind, as to believe that the visible universe about us - built upon mathematical laws, knitted together by a million correspondences, and crowded thick with marks of purpose - is the work of mindless force."
MORE ABOUT "INADEQUATE THEORIES"
The three most popular theories today about the origin and nature and future of the universe are:
(1) "The Expanding Universe" theory. It postulates that "about five billion years ago the universe 'exploded' and began from a hard concentrated "primeval nucleus' of matter and radiant energy," * and it is "still expanding as a result of that original explosion: all galaxies are rushing away from the original nucleus at terrific speeds." But when astronomer Hubble's calculations suggested that the "more distant galaxies were rushing away from us at a 25,000-mile-per-second speed," he became skeptical of his own theory. Such fantastic speeds for vast bodies of matter seem absurd. Furthermore, his theory makes our earth the center of the expanding universe - and this is not consonant with other theories that put our solar system near the edge of our galaxy, with no one knowing exactly where our galaxy is relative to the universe. **
* Neither Georges Lemaitre, Belgian astronomer, nor Edwin Powell Hubble and George Gamow, American astronomers (nor any other astronomer) who espouses this theory has ever deigned to tell us where this original "primeval nucleus of matter and radiant energy" came from!
** The basis for belief in an "Expanding Universe" - the well known "Doppler effect" - is subject to other interpretations. We have no quarrel with those who accept this theory - but let us remember, it is but one of many theories. To us it seems absurd to believe that "distant galaxies are rushing away from us at speeds of 25,000 miles PER SECOND" and more. Such speeds for vast masses of matter are fantastic and unreal.
(2) The "Steady-state" Expanding Universe theory, advanced by Fred Hoyle (of Cambridge) and other astronomers. This theory postulates that the "expanding universe" is maintained in a "steady state" by the "continuous creation of new matter, from which is evolved new galaxies as the older galaxies rush out into limitless space." He actually predicates an absurdity, for matter cannot create itself. "Something" cannot be produced from "nothing," except by the power of the Creator.
(3) The "Finite Universe of Curved Space" theory, suggested by Albert Einstein - based on his theory of relativity. He suggested that space "may be curved into a non-Euclidean form" (i.e., not flat, like the geometry of Euclid that was limited to a plane), which would give us a closed but unbounded universe of finite volume, if the curvature is "positive." *
* If the curvature is "negative" - as some say - (like the curvature from the inside of a tyre that radiates outward, and not like the curvature from the outside of a tyre that radiates inward) the lines of curvature would expand endlessly. The inferences from this "negative" curvature hypothesis are preposterous.
This theory approximates what the Bible teaches: a finite, though very large universe, the work of the Hands of the Almighty Creator.
"In the beginning GOD CREATED the heaven and the earth." (Genesis 1:1).
There are of course scores of other theories as to the nature of the universe; we have selected three that are widely discussed at the moment. There is not a single theory of the origin and nature of the universe, that denies Divine creation, but that actually resolves itself into an absurdity, or else can be shown to be fallacious, by known facts.
Is it not wonderful to be able to turn from man's vain thoughts and philosophies and rest on the fundamental fact that the ETERNAL, ALMIGHTY GOD made this vast universe as it is: a glorious display of His infinite wisdom and vast power! A great universe in no wise militates against creation: it simply proves the greatness of the Creator!
"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork." (Psalms 19:1)
"When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which thou hast ordained; What is man, that thou art mindful of him?" (Psalms 8:3, 4).
"Thou, even thou, art LORD alone; thou hast made heaven, the heaven of heavens, with all their host, the earth, and all things that are therein" (Neh. 9:6 ).
"Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for THY pleasure (WILL) they are and were created." (Revelation 4:11).
It should be unnecessary for us to have to refute the charge that "the Bible teaches that God created the heaven and the earth 4,000 B.C.." The Bible clearly teaches that "In the beginning" God created the universe (Genesis 1:1; John 1:1-3) - and that far off date may have been "five billion" years ago, more or less.
The Bible does teach that in comparatively recent times God "re-created" the earth and made it habitable for mankind, and that God created Adam and Eve comparatively recently. *
* Many bible Students believe there is a vast period of time - giving room for all geologic ages - between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:3. Apparently a pre-Adamic judgment brought the original earth into the chaos and darkness described in Genesis 1:2. See Jeremiah 4:23-26, Isaiah 24:1 and Isaiah 45:18 that clearly indicate that the earth underwent "a cataclysmic change as the result of divine judgment." (Scofield Reference Bible, note on Genesis 1:2).
The LIMITATIONS of modern Astronomy
We are told that the 200-inch telescope "can peer out into space a distance of two billion light years" - which means that a diameter of FOUR BILLION LIGHT YEARS OF SPACE comes into the view of this modern telescope! This is most astonishing; but we must call attention to some limitations, and possibilities of error, that confront modern astronomy. ALL of these "arguments" and "objections" presented here are quoted from modern astronomers and scientists.
"The only way we can judge the distance (of distant galaxies) is by the faintness of their light. But we must also remember that we are looking far back in time. The intrinsic brightness of galaxies may change with time. CONSEQUENTLY WE CANNOT BE SURE THAT A DISTANT GALAXY IS FAINTER THAN ANOTHER THAT IS FARTHER AWAY. (Modern Cosmology, Scientific American).
Suggesting that the theories arising from the "red-shift" ("Doppler effect") on the spectrum may be wrong, H. P. Robertson, Professor of Mathematics, California Institute of Technology, says,
"Possibly the reddening of light from the distant galaxies is due TO SOME UNKNOWN SMALL INFLUENCE on it during its tremendous journey to us, rather than to a Doppler effect caused by the motion of the source. then too, the distant nebulae may remain indefinitely where they are (rather than be rushing out into space) and the degradation (running down) of the universe may be caused by the frittering away of light rather than loss of matter through escape (by rushing off into outer space)."
Commenting on Einstein's theory of the Curvature of Space, a writer in the book of knowledge says,
"If space actually is so curved, then it would be reasonable to assume that rays of light from a star, which start on their way through the universe, will be curved and bent to fit the form of the universe. . . . and we might conceivably be able to observe 'ghost images' of stars or nebulae or galaxies on the opposite side of our universe!"
It is interesting to note that there has been PROOF of Einstein's theory of the Curvature of Space.
"Einstein's idea of the gravitational curvature of space-time was triumphantly affirmed by the discovery of perturbations in the motion of Mercury at its closest approach to the sun and of the DEFLECTION OF LIGHT RAYS BY THE SUN'S GRAVITATIONAL FIELD." (P. Le Corbeiller, in "The Curvature of Space," Scientific American). Mr. Corbeiller also mentions the interesting fact that our own EARTH illustrates the "Finite Universe" idea. He says, "This is a most remarkable fact: the surface of the earth is boundless and yet it is finite."
And this suggests to the Christian thinker the nature of the universe as a whole.
H. C. van de Hulst, writing on " 'Empty' Space" in the Nov., 1955, Scientific American, says,
"Another proof that interstellar space is not empty came . . . (when) about in 1930, astronomers discovered with some shock that as the light of stars passes through certain regions of interstellar space it is dimmed and scattered in various directions. . . . If there was indeed an interstellar haze which dimmed the light of distant stars or made them altogether invisible, then many of their calculations of star distances and their picture of our galaxy WERE WRONG. Further studies proved that the fear was justified. STARLIGHT PASSING THROUGH THE CROWDED REGIONS OF OUR GALAXY LOSES ROUGHLY HALF OF ITS ENERGY BY ABSORPTION AND SCATTERING IN EVERY 2,000 LIGHT YEARS OF ITS TRAVEL. As a result, even with our most powerful telescopes, we cannot see the center of our galaxy, some 25,000 light years away. Beyond about 6,000 light-years from our observing station most of our studies of the galaxy are literally lost in the fog." (Caps ours).
Many of the theories of modern astronomy are entirely untenable, or are at least challenged by other outstanding authorities. Reason and logic and the Bible assure us that this Universe was made and is upheld by an Almighty Being of Great Glory, Wisdom and Power!
We might add here the statement in the article on "Exploring the Depths and Heights" (Popular Science; p.3611):
"Still other theories of the origin of the universe have been proposed; but none has been definitely proved or widely accepted. The origin of our universe (to science) REMAINS AS BAFFLING A MYSTERY AS EVER."
There is one other thought we call attention to:
The Innumerable MYSTERIES in the Universe
Not only is the "origin of the universe" an insoluble "mystery" to science (for some scientists wilfully reject the fact of GOD), but also there are scores of other mysteries that continue to baffle the modern astronomer.
Of the thousands of baffling mysteries wrapped in the intricacies of the universe we mention but a few.
(1) The Mysteries of Radio-activity and Nuclear Fusion:
Proof that the Universe had a Beginning
"to assume that the universe had no beginning . . . fails to account for the CONTINUED EXISTENCE OF RADIOACTIVITY." (Scientific American). Obviously, if the universe had no beginning, radioactivity - the degeneration of elements that are radio-active into lighter elements, such as the degeneracy of radium into lead - would have degenerated into lighter elements.
ALSO, since hydrogen is the "mother" element of the universe, and since the stars are kept alive by means of nuclear fusion - the slow transmutation of hydrogen into helium - and since the universe STILL IS MADE UP of 98% hydrogen and only 1% helium, obviously, the universe had a beginning NOT TOO LONG AGO. Otherwise, the hydrogen of the universe long ago would have turned into helium, by the processes of nuclear fusion going on all the time in the stars! To put the matter bluntly and plainly - THE STARS WOULD HAVE "BURNED OUT" LONG AGO IF THE UNIVERSE HAD NO BEGINNING. It does not take too much thinking to see that the universe HAD to have a beginning, not too long ago. (Five billion years is not long for the lifetime of a vast universe). Everywhere you turn, one is forced back to the teachings of the Bible! GOD CREATED THE UNIVERSE! (Note: your typist believes God created THIS WORLD only 6,000 years ago! Because God's Prophet Ellen G. White says so in her book SPIRITUAL GIFTS Vol. 3, page 91. (Amos 3:7).
A science writer in "SCIENCE DIGEST" speaks of this fact that explains the continuous "burning" of all the stars of the sky: "So when hydrogen is converted into helium, both heat and light are produced, and a certain amount of hydrogen is completely converted into helium."
(2) The Mystery of the Exploding Stars. About two dozen exploding stars show up every year in our nearest neighbor spiral galaxy, the Andromeda nebula. These exploding stars are called "novae" or "supernovae." No one fully understands why they do this. The supernovae" flare up into a vastly greater display then the "novae".
"What sets off a nova's flare-up may be a true explosion of the star, or perhaps a nuclear chain reaction like that in the atomic bomb." (National Geographic Magazine). But then again, it may be from some other cause. No one knows.
(3) The Mystery of the "Variables" or Pulsating Stars. Among the stars are groups of stars that astronomers call "variables" or "pulsating stars." They mysteriously grow brighter and then dimmer again with "much - exactness - about as much, say, as Old Faithful geyser in Yellowstone National Park." Each of these stars has its own rhythm. A number pulsate in a few hours or a day; others may consume several months or a year for their particular cycle. The entire subject of "pulsating stars" is most fascinating.
(4) The Mystery of Cosmic Rays. Every minute of the day, "mysterious rays from some remote corner of space, possibly the stars, come hurtling through the atmosphere to bombard the earth with showers of particles. . . . In the time it takes to read this paragraph, you will be hit by more than 200 particles, which you can't hear, feel or see. . . ". (What's Behind Those Cosmic Rays?").
Moreover, there are in our solar system (and presumably in other parts of the universe),
"Vast aggregations of infinitesimally minute particles - electrons, protons and nuclei of atoms - which constitute a hitherto unsuspected element of the solar system. Hydrogen nuclei have been detected in them, and they may consist chiefly of this mother gas of all creation."
The more research that is done, THE MORE COMPLICATED THE PHYSICAL UNIVERSE PROVES TO BE! It is all so involved, so well-balanced and so wisely planned that the mind of man is incapable of grasping all its wonders!
There are many other "Mysteries" in the universe that would make interesting topics for discussion, but we have suggested enough to let us all realize that an INFINITE GOD is the Designer and Creator of this vast system! *
* Science now reports a new marvel: the "QUASI-STELLARS, " reported to be from 6 to 10 billion light years away and "spectacular events of unprecedented grandeur." (LIFE, 1-24-'64
In view of the fact that man is created in the image of God, we agree with the conclusion of Dr. Schilt. Dr. Schilt, an astronomer, was asked,
"Is man just a mite on a planet in a vast universe? Is man less significant than a flea on an ant's back?" "No," the astronomer replied. "Finding all these star systems is just a game - an artificial game. The thing we really have to account for is the OBSERVER. Now if the earth is the only place where there is an observer, then IT CERTAINLY IS "THE CENTER OF THE UNIVERSE.' . . .It is conceivable that no life exists in our universe except on our own earth. . . .So it makes more sense to me that man IS the "center" of the universe, that he is the sole observer." *
* Dr. Brown speaks in an article (National Geographic Magazine) of "The riddle of man's place in the Universe." This "riddle" also is solved in the Word of God. Man being an intelligent being, with a free will, and created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26, 27), and being ALIVE, is of vastly more importance than a lifeless mass of suns, stars and even galaxies! The EARTH, though comparatively small, is of such great importance in God's scheme of things, that He has plans eventually to MOVE HIS HEADQUARTERS DOWN TO THE "NEW EARTH" when He creates "a new heavens and a new earth" (see Rev. 21 and 22). The drama of human history became the very cynosure of the Universe when Christ, God's Son, came to earth, in the Incarnation, that He might redeem a fallen race by His atoning death on the cross. The entire intriguing story is told in the Bible. It is summed up in John 3:16.
And God made the EARTH especially for this "sole observer."
"The heaven, even the heavens, are the Lord's: but the earth hath He given to the children of men." (Psalms 115:16).
This reminds one of the eighth Psalm:
"When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, the moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained; what is man, that Thou art mindful of him, and the son of man that Thou visitest him. . .Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of Thy hands; Thou hast put all things under his feet." (vs. 3-6)
"Countless suns are ever circling
through the boundless realms of space,
And the God whose hand has made them
Keeps each orb in its true place.
All revolve in perfect order
Harmony complete we see,
Yet the God whose will they follow
Is the God who thinks of me."
11. THE WITNESS OF THE ATOM
Relatively speaking, "man stands somewhere midway between the stellar universe and the atom." The one is well nigh infinitely large - so large that it stretches out into space far beyond the reach of his most powerful telescopes. The other is almost infinitely small - so small that it diminishes into incredible minuteness, and then shaves off into the virtual nothingness of some of its particles, far beyond the reach of man's most powerful electron microscopes. Both the universe of the stars and the world of the atoms witness to the almighty power and infinite wisdom of our God.
The Molecule
Science defines the molecule as "the smallest particle of any chemical compound." Most all matter on earth is made up of these tiny particles called molecules. They are the "basic building blocks" of all chemical compounds, such as salt (a compound of sodium and chlorine) and water (a compound of hydrogen and oxygen). Over a million different kinds of molecules (hence that many chemical compounds) are known to modern science.
Yet molecules are small - very small. So small in fact that "a ¼-ounce teaspoon of water has in it 9,940,000, 000,000,000,000,000,000 molecules!"
The Atom
All molecules, even though so small, are divided into yet smaller units called atoms. If a substance is made up of atoms of one kind, it is called an element; but if a substance is made up of two or more kinds of atoms, it is called a chemical compound. While there are, as stated above, over a million known and classified chemical compounds, nature has only around 100 essential elements. *
* In recent years scientists, through modern atom-smashing machines, have created some 12 to 15 more "elements" that are not found in nature. These are usually very unstable, and are beyond the atomic weight of uranium. To science, there are about 107 elements, with nearly 100 of them found in nature.
Sixty years ago the "atom" (word derived from the Greek word that means "that which cannot be cut or divided") was defined as "the smallest indivisible particle of a chemical element." In this century scientists have discovered "with mounting astonishment" that the atom is so small that a tungston atom has been estimated to be only 5/1000ths of one-millionth of an inch in diameter.
Inside the Atom
Today we know that all atoms except the hydrogen ** are composed of (1) a nucleus, made up of (a) positively charged protons and (b) uncharged neutrons; and (2) electrons, negatively charged particles that revolve at high speed around the nucleus. Electrons are about 1840 times lighter than protons and neutrons.
** The hydrogen atom has only a proton and an electron. All other elements, from helium on up the atomic scale, have protons, neutrons and electrons.
The nucleus of an atom is so small that it is only "a millionth of a millionth of a millimeter" in diameter! And the electrons whirling around the nucleus are so small it would take roughly 500,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 of them to weigh one pound.
Sub-atomic Particles
Up to 1930 scientists had discovered only protons and electrons in the atom. In 1932 James Chadwick discovered the neutron. Now scientists have evidence that convinces them that in each atom there are not only protons, neutrons and electrons, but also an impressive list of several dozens of particles in each atom, so that it all becomes very confusing to the average untrained layman. They tell us not only of "photons" (the "quantity unit of radiation") but also of "pions," "positrons," "neutrinos," "mesons," and a fantastic array of other particles - and even "anti-particles" - that theoretical and experimental physicists have found evidence for. *
* In the September '58, Scientific American Magazine are listed 32 subatomic particles of matter and energy presently known to physicists. In 1962 University of California physicists listed '75 subatomic particles and 'resonances.' "
It is clear that the minute "indivisable" atom is unbelievably complex - so much so that it is fair to say that scientists never will be able fully to fathom its depths and to know and understand all that constitutes the "sub-atomic world."
The Six "Miracles" of the Atom
As we consider the marvels of the atomic world, we are literally FORCED to see the Hand of the Almighty Creator - for outside of Divine creation there is absolutely no theory that can adequately account for the wonders of the atom. We list here but six of the many "marvels" of the atom.
(1) The Miracle of the Minute SIZE of the atom, and its Constituent Particles
If an atom is so unbelievably small that "it takes 2,500,000,000,000 protons in a row to make a line an inch long" - how small are some of its lesser particles? Who but an infinite God could create such wonders?
Look around you: you see the dirt, the trees, the houses, the people; look above into the sky and see the stars. ALL things in all the universe are made up of these tiny atoms, each a miracle of creation! How marvelous is our God!
(2) The Miracle of the Tremendous SPEEDS of the electrons in Revolution Around the Nucleus of Each Atom
Each atom is a miniature "solar system," with the electrons whizzing around the nucleus (protons and neutrons) at astonishing speeds. These minute "electrons" dash around the nucleus "millions of times per second!" Moreover, the electrons revolve around the nucleus "in orbits whose diameters are about 10,000 times larger than the nucleus."
"Electrons revolve around the nucleus in an orbit less than one-millionth of an inch in diameter; and they make the revolutions several thousand million times every second."
(3) The Miracle of the "Empty SPACE" in Each Atom
An atom is built like our solar system. IT IS ALMOST ALL EMPTY SPACE. This seems incredible, but it is factual.
"Within the atom, electrons revolve around their nucleus several thousand million times a second. Each electron has as much room to move within the atom as a bee has to move around in a cathedral." (Sir Oliver Lodge).
Scientists say that "if you eliminated all the empty space in every atom in the body of a 200-pound man he would be no bigger than a particle of dust" (Arthur S. Eddington, in "The Nature of the Physical Universe"). And if the entire earth were likewise compacted "it would become a ball only one-half mile in diameter."
(4) the Miracle of the ELECTRIC CHARGE IN EACH ATOM
Each proton in an atom has a positive charge of electricity, and each electron has a negative charge that exactly balances the positive charge in the proton, with as many electrons outside the nucleus as there are protons inside. Who put the electricity in the atom, and balanced the normal atom so finely?
(5) The Miracle of the Immense COHESIVE FORCE in the Nucleus of the Atom
Ordinarily, like charges of electricity in different objects that are close to each other REPEL each other; but in the nucleus of the atom God has reversed the law of nature scientists are familiar with (called Coulomb's Law). In the nucleus of the atom, in which all the protons have a positive charge, instead of repelling each other, they are held together by some unknown force of tremendous power! This phenomenon, to scientists, is the most mysterious thing about the atom; in fact, they call it "the basic mystery of the universe." (World Within Atoms).
In an article on "Pions," by Robert E. Marshak, in the "Scientific American," we read:
"The cement that holds the Universe together is the force of gravity. The glue holding the atom together is electromagnetic attraction. But the glue that holds the NUCLEUS of the atom together is a mystery that defies all our experience and knowledge of the physical world. It is a force so unlike any we know that we can hardly find words to describe it."
Seeking to explain this mystery, modern atomic physicists have come up with the theory that "in some way, not yet understood, pions (nuclear particles) are certainly involved in the nuclear binding force."
"The proton and neutron, once supposed to be the ultimate building blocks of matter (are now believed) to consist of a core surrounded by a fluctuating cloud of pions - an arrangement that reminds one of the atom with its nucleus and planetary electrons" - and that gives us this phenomenon; an infinitestimal 'planetary system' within an already infinitestimal planetary system! And it's all so small that this inner core (nucleus) "occupies only a thousandth of a millionth of a millionth of the space within the atom." (World Within the Atom, Columbia University Press).
This terrific energy, coiled like a spring, within the nucleus of the atom, is known the world over as NUCLEAR ENERGY. Nuclear energy is so tremendous that
"If it were possible to convert one pound of any matter entirely into electrical energy, you could run with it ALL THE ELECTRICAL APPARATUS IN THE U. S. FOR A WHOLE MONTH."
This "force," great and mysterious as it is, is spoken of in the Word of God. CHRIST is the source of this power.
"For in Him (Christ) were all things created. . . .all things have been created through Him and unto Him; and he is before all things, and in HIM all things consist (Gr., 'hold together')" (Col. 1:16,17).
(6) The Miracle of the Mysterious Action of Atomic Particles
Each passing year brings new discoveries about the atom and its particles - "the basic miracle of the Universe." Writing in the Saturday Evening Post, on "The Elusive Neutron" (2-5-'61), Donald J. Hughes says,
"Although we can learn to visualize their size, we fail utterly when we witness the action of atomic particles. . . . for the laws governing the action of atomic particles are completely alien to the every day world. . . . The sub-atomic particles, subject to quantum mechanics, act as both a particle and a wave. . . .They show concentration in space, as do particles, and yet they spread simultaneously over a (comparatively) large distance, as a wave does."
Wonder of wonders! Out of these small atomic particles God created His vast Universe!
"Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear." (Hebrews 11:3).
111. THE UNBRIDGEABLE CHASM
BETWEEN THE NON-LIVING AND THE LIVING
In general, scientists call living things, or things derived from living things, "organic"; and the non-living, "inorganic."
The galactic universe - the macrocosm - is certainly vast and majestic - and it speaks to us of the power and glory of our God - but it is inorganic, lifeless in itself. How can life exist in the intense heat of a "burning" star?
The atoms speak to us of the miracle of God's creation in the microcosm, the world that approaches the infinitely minute, but there is no life in either the whirling electrons or the center core, the nucleus - even though there is plenty of mystery, action and power in each atom and its particles.
When we look around on earth, we see the phenomena of LIFE on all sides: plant life, animal life, life in the sea, in the air and on the land. It exists in over a million different forms from invisible viruses and bacteria to highly complex and well organized life in the higher animals and man. Where did life on earth come from? How did it all start?
Since there is no such thing as spontaneous generation - life must always come from life - we conclude that life on earth, as the Bible says, was created by God.
"And God said, "Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth" and it was so.
"And God said, "let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life. . . .
"And God created great whales and every living creature that moveth. . . .(Gen. 1:11, 20, 21; see also vs. 24-27).
The ETERNAL GOD, who made the Universe and all things in it, is the true "secret of the Universe."
Pre-organic Conditions on Earth and the Requirements of Life that Demand Creation
All scientists agree that there was a time when there was no life on earth. Fred Kohler says:
"According to the best estimates, living matter began to develop about one to two billion years ago from the then existing non-living material" (p. 12, "Evolution and Human Destiny:).
But according to this same author - who is, by the way, an ardent evolutionist - the prerequisite for life on earth is the presence on earth of some form of "organic compounds."
"The non-living material which existed on this planet at the time at which the first structures that can be termed "living" developed, must have included some organic compounds of a high order of complexity." . . . And "as the organic compounds that gave rise to living structures could not have existed at the time the earth began to solidify, they in turn must have developed from simpler substances. It is consequently apparent that a 'pre-organic' evolution of chemical complexity must have preceded the evolution of life." (Evolution and Human Destiny, pp. 12, 13).
Now the question logically arises, What gave rise to these "pre-organic compounds" that had to be on earth before life could either come to pass, or be sustained after it got here?
Fred Kohler frankly admits the evolutionist faces a real problem here. He says:
"Life represents matter organized into systems of great complexity. How such orderly aggregates could develop in the first place, persist and continue to become more complex, is not so easily explainable in terms of the generally accepted laws of the physical sciences." (Ibid., p. 14).
Then he goes on to tell us WHY the presence of life on earth can not be easily explained.
The "Second law of Thermodynamics"
Mr. Kohler says:
"One of the most fundamental maxims of the physical sciences is the trend toward the greater randomness; the fact that on the average things will get into disorder rather than into order if left to themselves. This is essentially the statement that is embodied in the Second Law of Thermodynamics" (Ibid., pp. 14-15).
This "Second Law of Thermodynamics" is very interesting. It teaches, as Mr. Kohler says, that "things will get into DISORDER rather than order, if left to themselves." This law infers and involves the fact of "the universal tendency toward decay" - and all nature demonstrates it!
Now note this well: The Second Law of Thermodynamics infers and teaches EXACTLY OPPOSITE TO WHAT EVOLUTION TEACHES! It demands universal decay rather than universal development. Careful, honest observers admit that the law of nature in both the inorganic and the organic world tends toward degeneracy rather than toward improvement.
This second Law of Thermodynamics is of universal application. The very universe itself is "running down," Instead of the sun and stars conserving their energy, they are gradually losing it, though it is a very slow process.
"Astronomers tell us that the sun is gradually losing its heat and also it weight. The loss of weight is at the rate of 250 tons a minute, or 120 million tons a year."
The Second Law of Thermodynamics * can also be seen at work in the radio-active elements in the atomic world. Uranium is in a constant state of decay even though its rate of disintegration is very slow.
* The First Law of Thermodynamics deals with heat transfer; the Second with Entrophy or heat loss; and the Third relates to the behaviour of chemical substances at low temperatures.
"Lord Rutherford's group at Cambridge proved that the radio-active elements uranium and thorium decay ultimately into helium and lead" (The Age of the Solar System, April, 1957, "Scientific American." **
** This gradual decay of the elements not only has enabled science to set an approximate date of "4.5 billion years ago when the earth and its neighbors were formed" (Age of the Solar System") - but it also is the positive proof that our earth and our universe HAD A BEGINNING. Matter is NOT eternal; if it were, uranium and thorium long ago would have deteriorated into helium and lead, and all stars ages ago would have burned out. GOD CREATED ALL THINGS IN THE BEGINNING!
And so the Second Law of Thermodynamics - a law of nature - becomes a witness for the need of DIVINE INTERVENTION before life could come. ALL THINGS - ALL FACTS - drive us back to GOD, the Original Cause.
The quotations given above by Dr. Fred Kohler actually give us a perfect case for creation even though he is arguing (in his book) for evolution. Let us summarize our arguments:
(1) There was a time on earth when there was no life; now there is abundant life.
(2) Before there can be life on earth, there must first be on earth "organic compounds of high complexity." But
(3) The Second Law of Thermodynamics sets forth the truth that things left to themselves will certainly NOT develop into "a high state of complexity" but will tend to "decay" and to degenerate into "more randomness."
(4) Therefore we must conclude that a Power greater than and apart from nature stepped in and created life. This Power, this original Cause, is of course the living God.
Complex Proteins
The "organic compounds of high complexity" that must precede life on earth are proteins. Proteins are "the basic material of life." But proteins are always and only made by living organisms! *
* A few years ago a chemist, Stanley Miller, working at the University of Chicago, put into a flask what evolutionists believe to have been the chief elements of the atmosphere two or three billion years ago: methane, ammonia, hydrogen and water. He exposed them repeatedly to an electric spark. In a week he succeeded in producing three amino acids, which are essential constituents of protein. From this experiment evolutionists presume that "lightning acting on the earth's atmosphere" may have formed the first protein molecules necessary to life. But this is wishful thinking. Proteins are highly complex requiring "about 20 or more different amino acids" (not three), arranged in most intricate, involved "peptide chains." They are far too complex and involved to "just happen."
So here again the evolutionists faces an impasse, a situation that stumps him. If proteins are necessary for life, and proteins come only from living organisms, where did the original proteins - without which there can be no life - come from?
Paul Doty, writing on Proteins in the "Scientific Monthly" says:
"Thousands of different proteins go into the make-up of a living cell. They perform thousands of different acts in the exact sequence that causes the cell to live. How the proteins manage this exquisitely subtle and enormously involved process WILL DEFY OUR UNDERSTANDING FOR A LONG TIME TO COME (caps ours). . . . Protein molecules are giant molecules of great size and complexity and diversity. . . .Proteins are polypeptides of elaborate and very specific construction . . . (with) the long chains of each protein apparently folded in a unique configuration which it seems to maintain so long as it evidences biological activity (life).
For proteins to "just happen" or develop by natural processes is as unlikely as getting a Gettysburg Speech together by stirring a million macaroni "letters" in a bowl of soup! For proteins are unbelievably complex. Some protein molecules actually have "hundreds, even thousands, of atoms in formations which stagger the imagination."
"Proteins, the keystone of life, are the most complex substances known to man. . . .For more than a century chemists and biochemists have labored to try to learn their composition and solve their labyrinthine structure. . . .In 1954 a group of investigators finally succeeded in achieving the first complete description of the structure of a protein molecule. *
* Since then the structures of other protein molecules have been resolved. See the Feb., 1961, "Scientific American."
The protein (they studied) is insulin, . . . one of the smallest proteins. Yet its formula is sufficiently formidable. The molecule of beef insulin is made up of 777 atoms, in the proportion of 250 carbon, 377 hydrogen, 65 nitrogen, 75 oxygen and 6 sulphur. . . . Of the 24 amino acids 17 are present in insulin." ("The Insulin Molecule," Scientific American).
Fredrick Sanger, of Cambridge University, one of the group that finally worked out the "labyrinthine" structure of the insulin protein molecule actually "spent ten years of study on this single molecule!" (Scientific American). Only a trained biochemist can appreciate how involved a protein molecule is. The layman is impressed, but not sufficiently, by descriptions of the insulin protein molecule. But let us quote a little more:
"The insulin protein molecule consists of 51 amino acid units in two chains. One chain has 21 amino acid units; it is called the glycyl chain. The other chain has 30 amino acids; it is called the phenylalanyl chain. These chains are joined by sulphur atoms."
We will not burden the reader by more quotations as to the intricate nature of the protein molecule, except to say that anyone who takes the time to look into the structure of the protein molecule must be convinced that such a fantastically complicated structure could hardly come about by mere chance: it is far too complex. And so the tiny PROTEIN MOLECULE - essential to, and a prerequisite of, life on earth, becomes a most effective witness for GOD, ITS CREATOR.
Proteins are of special interest not only because of their vast complexity of structure, but also because of their great variety and versatility in nature.
"There are tens of thousands, perhaps as many as 100,000, different kinds of proteins in a single human body. They serve a multitude of purposes." (The Structure of Protein Molecules, Scientific American).
It is obvious to us, and we trust it is also to the reader, that only God could bridge the chasm between non-living atoms and life, even in its lowest forms, and that only God could and did create the intricate proteins that are necessary for life on earth.
* * *
TESTIMONIES OF DEVOUT SCIENTISTS
Kepler, overawed with a sense of God's majesty in the firmament, said as the discovery of His "Third Law," came to mind (March 8, 1618), "God has passed before me in the grandeur of His ways. Glorify Him, ye stars in your ineffable language, and thou, my soul, praise Him!"
The immortal Newton exclaimed with deep reverence, "Glory to God who has permitted me to catch glimpse of the skirts of His garments."
Chapter 5.
The Witness of MICROSCOPIC FORMS OF LIFE to the Fact of
Divine Creation
A Discussion of "spontaneous Generation"
The Ladder of Creation
There are nine basic steps in the Ladder of Creation: (1) the Atom, the basic building block of the physical universe; (2) the Molecule, the basic particle of any chemical compound, made up of two or more atoms; (3) the Protein Molecule, derived from either plant or animal life, and a prerequisite for life on earth; (4) Viruses, the smallest, simplest and "most primitive" of all living things; (5) Bacteria, single-celled, microscopic plants usually without chlorophyll (6) Single-celled Algae, plants having chlorophyll - one of the lowest forms of self-sustaining plant life; (7) Protozoa, most of which are single-celled, microscopic animals; (8) Metazoa, animals higher than protozoa, made up of more than one cell. (Also, the higher plants). The higher animals and man have many, many billions of cells in their complex bodies. (9) The complex body, mind and soul of man - created in the image of God. Each of these nine steps bears witness to the fact of Divine creation.
The Witness of VIRUSES to the fact of Divine Creation
Viruses (L., poison), are the smallest and simplest and "most primitive" of all living things. Viruses are essentially a protein molecule, containing protein and nucleic acid. They are ultra-microscopic in size - so small they can be seen only with an electron microscope. Viruses are halfway between the molecules of the chemist and the organisms of the biologist. Viruses are parasites on both plants and animals. Their three most common shapes are those of a rod, a sphere and a tadpole. The most minute viruses are unbelievably small, each one weighing only 1/1,000,000,000,000,-000 of a gram. Viruses, as is well known, are responsible for such diseases as smallpox, yellow fever, mumps, polio, and many other human diseases, as well as scores of mosaic diseases of plants. *
-------------------
* In 1901 Walter Reed and his co-workers discovered for the first time that yellow fever in man was caused by a virus. Since that time "more than 300 different diseases of animals, man, plants, and even bacteria have been found to be caused by viruses" (Smithsonian Report, 1955; pp 357-368).
"Creation of Life in a Test Tube?"
A few years ago a flurry of excitement was caused by newspaper stories about "the creation of life in a test tube," at the University of California Virus Laboratory. Actually, all the laboratory had done, or claimed to have done, was to split the tobacco mosaic virus into its two components - protein and nucleic acid - and then they re-combined these particles into what looked like and acted like the original virus! If that is "creating life" then the act of cutting a skirt in two and sewing it together again makes one a first class magician! Beware of misleading newspaper accounts. No man has created or can create life. Let us now take a look at the seven ways in which the submicroscopic virus witnesses for God.
1. Many Viruses are a Deadly Poison. * What a strange start for evolution to take, in its FIRST attempt at creating life, to begin with a deadly poison! IF in its first step evolution developed a rank poison, what would the second-step be? and the following?
* Some viruses are not poisons. See article on "FRIENDLY VIRUSES" in the 8-'60, Scientific American.
The Bible explanation of the presence of DISEASE and DEATH in this world is far more reliable - and it fits all the facts. God pronounced judgment on the ground when Adam sinned; because of man's Fall, sickness and death came into human experience. (See Genesis 3:17, 18; Romans 6:23; 8:20, 21). The virus, placed in the world by the Almighty, is part of His restraining "curse" and part of the universal penalty of death on all mankind (Romans 5:12).
2. All Viruses are Parasites or Symbionts; they are utterly dependent on a "Host Cell." "No virus has yet been grown in the absence of living cells" (Smithsonian Institute Report, 1956). This simply means that the "host cell," a higher form of life than the virus, had to be created first. This is such a damaging fact to the evolutionary theory that evolutionists have had to invent a theory of "evolution in reverse" to account for the little virus. Marianna R. Bovarnick, writing in the "Scientific American," suggests that
"Viruses (are either) aberrant derivatives from cells or they are 'degenerate end-products of an evolution from some higher form.' "
Remember, a parasite is always a lower form of life than its host; and a parasite can not live aside from its host. Obviously, the "host cell" had to be in existence before its parasite, the virus.
3. The Virus has a unique method of Reproduction. Most protozoa and all body cells reproduce by a simple method of division called mitosis. Gunther S. Stent, writing on "The Multiplication of Bacterial Viruses" (Scientific American) says, of the method of reproduction of Viruses:
"The process of heredity - how like begets like - is one of the most fascinating mysteries in biology . . . None is more exciting than (that of) bacterial viruses. Here is an organism that reproduces its own kind in a simple and dramatic way. A virus attaches itself to a bacterium and quickly slips inside. Twenty-four minutes later the bacterium pops open like a burst balloon, and out come about 200 new viruses, EACH AN EXACT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL INVADER. What is the trick by which the virus manages to make all these living replicas of itself from the hodge-podge of materials at hand? What happens in the host cell in those critical 24 minutes?" (Caps ours).
No magician ever pulled rabbits out of a hat with a greater sense of magic and surprise than the miraculous transformation of one virus into 200, in a matter of twenty-four minutes!
This is not only a miracle of reproduction that science is at a loss to understand or explain, but also it is a reproduction "After its kind," following the biblical law laid down by the Creator in Genesis 1. All through history the simple viruses have been reproducing in this miraculous way "after their kind," with no change to a higher form. According to evolutionists viruses have been reproducing for a billion years or more - and there is NO EVOLUTION IN SIGHT YET! If the tiny little virus is ever going to evolve it better get going soon - don't you think?
4. Viruses can not create themselves. Scientists have been trying desperately to get a virus to emerge out of a man-concocted brew of amino acids, proteins, nucleic acids, and what have you. But many are convinced the attempt is hopeless. Dr. Fred Kohler, a leading advocate of evolution, says in his book, "Evolution and Human Destiny,"
"A virus can not create amino acids; viruses can not synthesize their structure (make themselves) from a mixture of amino acids." Then the doctor again reminds us that "Amino acids, unless synthesized by plants, are now only available in nature through the breakdown of living material." (p. 22)
If they can not make themselves, and evolution can not make them, who DID make them? The answer is simple: "In the beginning GOD CREATED."
5. A virus is one of the most Mysterious of all forms of life. Viruses can be put into crystalline form resembling salt. This crystal appears to be dead; it is dead; it can be kept almost indefinitely without apparent change. But put it into a living tissue - and something happens. The viruses start to eat, grow and multiply, in their host cells! "Even after repeated crystallization, a treatment no other living substance has ever been able to survive, viruses resume their activities and multiply when returned to favorable conditions (host cells)." (Animals Without Backbones).
"If we can but discover the secrets carried within the virus structures, we will have gone a long way . . . It may appear amazing that Nature selected the borderline between the living and the non-living worlds to house secrets of such great importance, yet sober reflection will reveal the wisdom of this course of action." (Smithsonian Institute Report, 1955).
"While inside a host (cell), the virus is intensely alive. . . .but between invasions, say while it lies on a kitchen table top, the virus can be thought of as essentially no different from an inert grain of sugar. this double existence affords a great scientific challenge." (The Physics of Viruses, Ernest C. Pollard, Dec., 1954, Scientific American).
6, Viruses show a most Amazing Design, a truly wonderful Architecture. A virus is designed so that (1) It can attach itself to the surface of a bacterial cell; (2) This contact with a living cell immediately "uncorks" an enzyme in its tail, which probably has the function of opening a hole in the "skin" of the bacterium; (3) the virus pours its own DNA (desoxyribonucleic acid) into its host; (4) this DNA then induces the synthesis of a new protein in the host cell; (5) finally, units of the protein combine with the DNA to form 200 or so exact copies of the parent virus! So involved is the protein in a virus that one authority says,
"The protein of the virus can be broken down into subunits, each of which is a single peptide chain containing about 150 amino acids." (Re-building a Virus, Heinz Fraenkel-Conrat, June 1956, Scientific American).
This whole amazing machine, so small it has to be magnified 100,000 times before man can see it and study it, HAS ABOUT 150 AMINO ACIDS ) the material from which proteins are made) IN IT; and it has the ability to pierce the tough walls of a cell, enter the cell, take possession, and transform the contents of that cell in a few moments time INTO 200 OR SO REPLICAS OF ITS OWN IMAGE! That such a miracle could "just happen" is beyond belief. The very intricacies of the "most primitive" (Fred Kohler) form of life REVEALS THAT IT IS THE HANDIWORK OF AN ALL-WISE, ALL-POWERFUL CREATOR.
7. Viruses are capable of Mutating, but not of "Transmutating." Because polio viruses stay polio viruses, and because yellow fever viruses stay yellow fever viruses, etc., doctors can successfully wage war against them - and our own scientists can develop vaccines that successfully fight the polio virus!
But viruses do "mutate" under certain conditions. A host cell may contain "a mild or latent virus, with the possibility of a very virulent virus strain forming" (Chemical Studies on Viruses, Stanley). Viruses do mutate (change) some, and adapt themselves to new environments; BUT, it is impossible to get a virus of one disease producing culture (like polio) to transmutate into an entirely different type of virus that will produce another disease. And so the minute viruses act as do all other forms of life: they may and do "mutate" within certain limits - but they NEVER transmute into an entirely different type of virus.
Let us consider next
The Witness of BACTERIA to the fact of Divine Creation
Bacteria, one step in the scale of creation above viruses, are as a rule microscopic, single-celled plants, without chlorophyll. Most plants, other than bacteria, that do not have chlorophyll are called "fungi." *
* Most plants (there are exceptions) have chlorophyll, the substance that enables them, through photosynthesis, to manufacture their own food from air and sunshine. Bacteria as a rule live largely by katabolism (destruction) instead of by anabolism (construction). Most bacteria must live on organic matter.
Without going into unnecessary repetition about the wonders of bacteria that parallel those of viruses, we would call attention to four facts of supreme importance:
(1) Most Bacteria, like viruses, must depend on a higher form of life. Each bacterium consists of a single cell (without a definite nucleus) much smaller then any other plant or animal. Many bacteria, related to fungi, live on dead matter, or as parasites in the bodies of plants and animals. This means that the higher forms of life had to be created first. This fact is damaging to the theory of evolution.
(2) Bacteria, like viruses, have distinctly different shapes and forms, though they are microscopic in size. Round bacteria are called cocci; these in chains are termed "streptococci" - source of the familiar "strep sore throat." Bacteria shaped like tiny rods are called bacilli. Still others are shaped like a comma (,) and are called spirilla. This variety suggests design for an intended purpose.
(3) Bacteria, like viruses, have a predetermined, planned economy laid out for them. In general, they were created to be scavengers - "to break down the bodies of the dead" - so that the vital organic elements in bodies of dead animals and plants might be returned to the soil to be used by future generations. Bacteria, generally, are "saprophytes," that is they live on the dead. God, in His supreme wisdom, planned an economy in nature that works; and He gave bacteria a definite place in His over-all plan. Were it not for bacteria, and certain other organisms, the bodies of dead animals and plants would not decompose and return to the soil to make food for future generations - they would accumulate. Bacteria, are constantly at work decomposing dead leaves, carcasses, manure etc.
"The microbes of putrefaction (bacteria) resolve dead bodies and plants into sulphates, phosphates, nitrates, etc.," that return to the soil, "and so the cycle of life is complete." (The Great Cycles of Life).
That such a wonderful system in nature, with each form of life having its necessary function, all working together in a state of perfect balance, should happen by "chance" is unthinkable.
(4) Bacteria, like viruses, exhibit a most amazing stability, popularly called "Fixity of Species." Bacteria, since their advent in the dawn of time, are still with us as bacteria!
The next step in the Ladder of Creation is the single-celled "algae," microscopic cells found in almost all waters of the world. These primitive plants lack roots, stems and leaves - but they do possess the magic chlorophyll, which enables them to get their food directly from inorganic matter through photosynthesis. We pass on to discuss some of the Protozoa in the animal kingdom, as Witnesses for God, though algae, too, are marvelous witnesses for Him.
The Witness of Protozoa * to the Fact of Divine Creation
*PROTOZOA is the name of the first of the "phyla" into which the animal kingdom is divided. The Phylum Protozoa (meaning "first animals") is made up of microscopic (generally) single-celled animals. The more than 15,000 species of protozoa occur everywhere in fresh and salt waters, in damp soils and dry sand, and even as parasites inside or on the bodies of other animals.
Of the 15,000 and more species of protozoa that have been classified and described by scientists, we select one, the AMEBA, as the best known, as a WITNESS FOR GOD.
The common ameba is found in fresh water ponds, and ranges in size from an invisible microscopic animal to one that reaches a diameter of about half a millimeter, visible to the naked eye as a tiny white speck. Each ameba is a little mass of gelatinous protoplasm, containing many granules and droplets. The protoplasm is covered with a delicate cell membrane. In many ways this strange little creature bears witness to its Creator.
(1) The Ameba is gifted with many Strange Abilities for a Microscopic Animal. It can crawl; it can breathe (though it has no lungs or gills); it can distinguish inert particles from the minute plants and animals on which it feeds; it can thrust out its jelly-like body at any point to lay hold of its food; it can digest and absorb its food; though it has no feet, it crawls by projecting "pseudopods." Such a strange little creature could not "just happen." One cannot fail to see in these abilities the Hand of the Creator.
(2) The Ameba moves around by means of "Ameboid movement," projecting a "pseudopod" (false foot) from any part of its body. Because of this it changes shape when it moves or engulfs food, hence its name - "ameba" (derived from a Greek word meaning "change"). The "legs" of an ameba are temporary, and soon flow back into its body, when it stops moving or completes the ingestion of food particles. This is totally different from the muscular movements of higher animals. Who designed it?
Moreover, if the ameba is about to "swallow" an active organism, the pseudopods are thrown out widely and do not touch or irritate the prey before it has been surrounded; but when the ameba is about to ingest a quiescent object, such as a single algal cell, the pseudopods surround the cell very closely. Apparently the ameba can "think" even though it has no brain.
The ameba gets around by means of the strange "ameboid movement"; but another protozoan, the paramecium, has its body covered with about 2500 short "hairs" (called cilia) which beat in the water somewhat like the motion of one's arms in swimming with the crawl stroke, so providing locomotion. Now the question arises: why do these two protozoa, living in a similar environment, have two such utterly different means of locomotion, IF they developed from the same source (possibly the flagellates?) through the processes of evolution? One is faced by an enigma of vast proportions, and an unanswerable problem. However, he who believes in Divine creation has the answer: the same God designed both the ameba and the paramecium, giving each a body "as it pleased Him." Evolution has no adequate answer to this problem: the problem raised by the great diversification of life in the same phylum, and in a similar environment.
Through past ages the lowly ameba has been absolutely static, showing no signs whatever of evolutionary change. If the so-called :law of evolution" has not succeeded in changing the simple ameba into a higher form, in the last billion years or so, where and when and how will it start? This is the more remarkable when one considers that there are countless numbers of amebas in the waters of the earth. And protozoa tend to multiply rapidly. *
* One paramecium could multiply to many billions in one month! Through countless billions of generations, involving countless trillions of individual amebas there has been NO EVOLUTION WHATEVER IN THE AMEBA; amebas we still have with us as amebas, the same as they were when God first created them. There is gradation of all life, from lower to higher; but there is no evidence whatever that the higher forms "evolved" from the lower forms.
Without hesitation we assert that EACH OF THE MORE THAN 15,000 SPECIES OF PROTOZOA GIVES A DISTINCT WITNESS TO THE FACT OF DIVINE CREATION. Each one has some peculiarity that is distinctive, that could NOT have evolved from anything and can not be accounted for except on the ground of special creation. Remember: "Natural selection cannot originate characters." (Prof. Coultre). We produce as our next witness the universal somatic CELL.
The Witness of CELLS to the Fact of Divine Creation
All life - plant and animals - has as its primary building blocks the body CELL. Cells are microscopic in size, ** and this enhances their wonders. The basic material in cells is called "protoplasm," described as "the most mysterious substance in the universe." Cells are of two main types: germ cells (sex cells) and body cells (somatic cells). Cells multiply by division; when a body grows, the cells do not get larger, but they multiply in numbers.
** Fifty typical cells from the human body, laid end to end, would not be as wide as the period at the end of this sentence.
A cell is made of (1) outer membrane; (2) a nucleus, in which are the chromosomes and "genes"; (3) cytoplasm, the gelatinous mass of the cell. In the cytoplasm are tiny substances, "organelles," having peculiar and very definite functions; they are known as centrosomes (containing two centrioles), mitochondria, the lysosome, Golgi bodies, etc., (See "Scientific American" on "CELLS," 9-'61)
(1) The Intricate Structure of the Cell is a Witness to its Divine Creator. From the chemist's viewpoint a living cell is made up of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, sulphur, phosphorus, chlorine, potassium, sodium, clacium, magnesium, iron, and small amounts of fluorine, iodine and traces of a few other minerals. But from the viewpoint of the biologist the cell is ALIVE, * with a working mechanism that is most marvelous. This working mechanism consists of (1) The nucleus, generally round or egg-shaped. It contains one or more dark bodies known as nucleoli and a number of extremely fine threads called chromosomes; these in turn consist of a large number of "genes," resembling beads on a string. We will have more to say later about the "chromosomes" and "genes."
* All living matter shows four distinct phenomena: (1) Irritability - the ability to respond to stimuli; (2) Metabolism - the ability to effect chemical changes in food and absorb it into its body, and to excrete the waste products; (3) Growth; (4) Reproduction.
The living cytoplasm that surrounds the nucleus is essentially a gelatinous substance in which are dissolved proteins, fats and salts. Imbedded in the cytoplasm are several functional elements that are the working parts of the cell:
(A) Each cell has several hundred mitochondria, that are constantly moving about with a sort of writhing motion. These mitochondria "play a central role in the oxidation of the cell's foodstuffs". . . .hence 'they supply the cell with most of its usable energy" (Powerhouse of the Cell, by Philip Siekevitz, July, 1957, Scientific American). All of this was PLANNED by the Master Architect. Mr. Siekevitz says:
"Many experiments demonstrate that the functional units of the mitochondroin have a DEFINITE ARCHITECTURE. We may say the same of the entire living cell. We have come a long way from the time when a cell was considered a bag of loose substances freely interacting with one another. THE CELL, LIKE THE MITOCHONDRION, HAS A RIGOROUS AND COMPARTMENTED ORGANIZATION. Perhaps this is not surprising; when we build a factory we do not park it raw materials and machines at random. We arrange matters so that the raw materials are brought in near the appropriate machines, and the product of each machine is efficiently passed along to the next. NATURE HAS SURELY DONE THE SAME THING IN THE LIVING CELL."
"Architecture" and "organization" speak to us of the Divine Architect!
How can anyone fail to see the earmarks of an infinite Creator as he examines the intricacies of the inner workings of an infinitestimal cell? Truly a "cell is an incredibly complicated structure." * Let us examine these workings further.
* The mitochondrion itself has a most complex anatomy, recently revealed by electron microscope studies by George E. Palade of the Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research, and others. The mitochondrion is bounded by a double membrane, often folded, apparently to increase its area. "Inside the mitochondrion are tiny bodies whose contents and function are entirely unknown. These features of the mitochondrion are similar in the mitochondrion of all plants and animals examined so far, from single-celled organisms to the cells in the body of man" (Powerhouse of the Cell, by Philip Siekevitz). Think of this: "Tiny bodies working WITHIN minute mitochondria," that in themselves are so small that several hundred of them are found in the cytoplasm of each cell - and the cell itself is microscopic. It is utterly unthinkable that any thing, or any one, less than a SUPREME BEING of infinite Intelligence and power could create a living cell!
The basic concept of evolution - that all life progressed from the "simple" forms to the more "complex" is utterly false. Nothing could be further from the truth. The atom, the protein molecule, viruses, bacteria, the somatic cell are unbelievably complex. For more about the CELL, see the ADDENDUM.
(B) The Process of Mitosis or Cell Division, is most amazing. When a cell divides to make two cells, each chromosome in the nucleus splits lengthwise, to form two identical new chromosomes. The chromosomes are all in the nucleus. Every species of plant or animal possesses a definite number of chromosomes in its cells.
Just outside the nucleus, lodged in the cytoplasm, is a minute body called the centrosome (central body). It divides into two; these then appear to act as "captains" or leaders in the intricate and fascinating process of animal cell division. First, in this process, the two centrosomes move apart; and between them fibril-like strands form a spindle; radiating strands appear around each centrosome, making them look like two stars. They now are called asters. Then the chromosomes split longitudinally, making identical "daughters" of each chromosome, and each half gravitates, with half of the protoplasm in the cytoplasm, toward one of the two aster-like centrosomes. This completes the process, and presto, there are TWO identical cells where only one existed before! Commenting on this, one authority says,
"the centrosome divides, its halves part, and these two halves are then the two directing and essential bodies from which proceed the cytoplasmic threads that control the splitting chromosomes, and draw the split portions to their appointed places. This nuclear division lies at the very heart of the problems of life. . . .Quite apart from its meaning and purpose, the mere series of facts is amazing. The detail is so precise and complicated, the order and program so clearly laid down, the result so exact, and the whole process so unfailing - yet all conducted in an arena where only the highest powers of the microscope can discern anything - that it beggars all attempts to explain." (The Book of Popular Science).
Here is a living system that WORKS, in an ultrmicroscopic world; and no one can explain WHY it works the way it does. Only the Supreme Designer understands the secrets of LIFE.
(C) Mysteries of Heredity in the Cell. Each species has its own kind, number * and assortment of chromosomes, and they differ from all other species. **
* Due to the large number of species of plants and animals, as many as twenty or more unrelated species may have identical numbers of chromosomes, but their chromosomes do NOT have identical shapes.
* * Human body cells generally have 46 chromosomes though in some individuals there are 47 or 48. The lily has 24; wheat has 42; and some crayfish have as many as 200.
Every chromosome in the different genera, "differs from every other in size, shape, or in some other respects, excepting that chromosomes always divide into pairs, and the two chromosomes in each pair are identical." So the Creator has "keyed" into each species by means of differing chromosomes - much like the combinations used in yale locks - thus assuring this tremendous fact: Chromosomes forbid transmutation and establish the stability of each different genus.
On the other hand each chromosome has a large number of "genes" *** that lend flexibility to each species, **** and give individuality to each member of each species.
*** In 1911 Thomas Hunt Morgan, then at Columbia University, advanced the theory that "genes are arranged in a 'linear file,' or row, on the chromosomes" - like beads on a string. Genetic scientists now speak of nucleic acid (DNA) "as the genetic material."
**** "Species" is variously defined. By "species" we mean the "members of a population that will interbreed and produce offspring." Generally speaking, if the members of different groups do NOT interbreed, they are of different species.
Genes have such vast possibilities of differing combinations that the net result in life is, NO TWO INDIVIDUALS IN ANY KNOWN SPECIES ARE EXACTLY ALIKE.
----------------------------
Here then is a fundamental law of genetics: CHROMOSOMES GUARANTEE THE STABILITY OF THE GENUS, AND GENES PROVIDE FOR INFINITE VARIETY WITHIN THE SPECIES.
Modern scientists have analyzed the nucleus of the cell, and have discovered that, chemically, it is composed largely of "nucleic acid" of which there are two kinds: DNA (short for deoxyribonucleic acid) and RNA (ribonucleic acid). DNA is always found in the nucleus of the cell, and RNA is found mainly in the cytoplasm outside the nucleus. The theory now is that what are popularly called "genes" are actually the "individual molecules" in this highly complex "nucleic acid" (DNA). Genetic theorists are still uncertain as to the essential nature of the so-called genes; but this we know: there are vital parts of each chromosome, minute units called genes, whether they be individual molecules, or in some other infinitestimal form, that give a practically limitless range of possible variations within each species.
Scientists have recently developed another amazing technique: they have "by very elegant genetic techniques (announced by Seynour Benzer, of Purdue University) mapped a single 'gene' of a bacterial virus; Benzer was able to distinguish more than 100 different functional sites arranged in a linear order along the length of the 'gene.' Assuming that genes are made of DNA we can trace a correspondence between his map and the DNA molecule." (Scientific American).
And so we see that every cell in every body on earth bears witness to the fact of DIVINE CREATION by giving evidence of "design" and "architecture" and "organizational ability" in a realm so small that those who take pictures of the ever-living and ever-changing drama going on in a cell have to use the electron microscope to do it! Each cell is ALIVE and life can come only from antecedent life. GOD WAS THE ORIGINAL LIFE-GIVER.
Cells bear constant witness to these fundamental facts of biology: THE CHROMOSOMES IN EACH CELL INSURE ITS STABILITY - it will and must "reproduce after its kind;" and THE "GENES" IN EACH CHROMOSOME PROVIDE FOR GREAT VARIETY "WITHIN THE BOUNDS" OF EACH SPECIES OR GENUS. These two facts are fatal to the theory of evolution.
The Effects of Radiation on Genes and Chromosomes
For many years scientists have experimented with the effects of physical and chemical stimuli (mostly through the use of radiation) on cells, especially on genes and chromosomes. "Abundant" gene mutations can be produced by X-rays (discovered by Muller, Stadler and Goodspeed in 1927); "but in more than 99 per cent of cases the mutation of a gene produces some kind of a harmful effect, some disturbance of function" (H. J. Muller in "Radiation and Human Mutation," Scientific American, Nov., 1955). The results of such experiments on cells can be seen in the report of work done on chickens at the University of Connecticut (reported by the American Cancer Society):
"Chicken monsters with such defects as a large single eye in the middle of the forehead or eyes in their palates have been produced in genetic experiments," conducted by Dr. Walter Landauer. "Other monsters also appeared - chicks with no lower jaw, chicks with dwarfed beaks or no beaks, chicks with no ears, and chicks with no heads."
Everywhere the results are the same: In over 90 per cent of the cases the use of chemical stimuli, or radiation, results in either DEATH or the "production of feeble, deformed or defective offspring." In less than one per cent mutations are wholesome, neutral, or insignificant. In no case is there transmutation from one genus to another. GOD HAS PUT UP "CHEMICAL BARRIERS" (Luther Burbank) BETWEEN THE GENERA that forbid transmutation from one genus to another.
"Among the hundreds of scientists currently working at the Brookhaven National Laboratory, in Upton, Long Island, where atomic energy is being studied in its many phases, there are about a dozen botanists . . . studying the effects of nuclear radiation on plants." They are observing "HOW RADIATION MAIMS AND DESTROYS LIVING ORGANISMS (Caps ours) . . . for radiation has power to raise havoc among genes and chromosomes." The trees, shrubs, vegetables and flowers that are deliberately exposed "to gamma rays emanating from a captive specimen of cobalt 60, confined to a stainless steel tube, 4 inches in diameter and 9 feet high" have produced hundreds of monstrosities and freaks - and a few "mutations" of which "the scientists are proud."
"Their most striking achievement in the Brookhaven garden, has been to make two different carnations - a red blossom called the William Sim, after its originator, and a white one called the White Sim - appear on the same plant." (The New Yorker, July 20, 1957).
The fact that very rarely a "mutant gene" appears that is not suffering a "harmful effect" (less than one per cent) is grasped with the earnestness born of despair by modern scientists and hailed as "evolution in action." We quote again from H. J. Muller's article on "Radiation and Human Mutation" (Scientific American, Nov., 1955):
"Very rarely a mutant gene happens to have an advantageous effect (the result of being acted on by radiation). This allows the descendants who inherit it to multiply more than other individuals in the population, until finally individuals with that mutant gene become so numerous as to establish the new type as the normal type, replacing the old. This process continued step by step, constitutes evolution."
But this "occasional" wholesome mutant is NOT A WHIT DIFFERENT FROM WHAT TAKES PLACE IN NATURE ALL THE TIME - except that in Nature the process is slower. Mutants do occur in nature, from which spring new "types," but this is NOT EVOLUTION but merely the development of various breeds and types within the genus. For evolution to work, and account for the gradual production of all higher forms of life from lower forms, IT IS NECESSARY THAT A LOWER GENUS CAN BE CHANGED INTO A HIGHER GENUS, and this has never occurred, either in nature or in experimental gardens or laboratories.
The average reader is generally aware of the harmful effects of radiation on genes, chromosomes and cells, for wide publicity has been given in the last few years to "the positive harmful effects of the 'fall-out' from nuclear explosions on mankind."
Obviously, the effect of radiation on genes is almost altogether injurious.
To sum up: Genes make possible the great VARIETY seen in species: and chromosomes establish the stability of each genus. What modern scientists label "evolution" is nothing more than what is seen daily in nature - the production of great VARIETY in species. But actual "evolution," the transmutation of one distinct genus into another, is ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE. God the Creator put an impassable barrier between the genera * that can not be crossed. IT TOOK A SPECIAL ACT OF DIVINE CREATION TO BRING INTO BEING EACH DISTINCT GENUS. The idea that the higher genera "evolved" from the lower is without foundation in fact.
* The Bible calls each distinct genus, "kind." God created all life "after his kind." See Genesis 1:11, 21, 24, 25. Because each "kind" of life on earth is the product of a special Divine creation, when reproduction takes place it is always "after his kind" (Gen., 1:11, 21, 24, 25). So, by the very laws of God, normal reproduction between "kinds" is ruled out. EVOLUTION HAS NO PLACE WHATEVER IN GOD'S SCHEME OF THINGS. "Evolution" exists only in the thinking and imagination of modern theorists; it has NO FOUNDATION IN FACT.
How about "Spontaneous Generation?"
If man could only produce "life" out of some concoction of dead chemicals, the materialistic evolutionist believes he would have proof for his theory of evolution. As a matter of fact, the entire theory of evolution is postulated on the supposition that life was spontaneously generated from non-living matter.
Blum wrote, "That life was 'spontaneously generated' from non-living matter at some time in the very remote past, and that this process has not been repeated for a long time are two basic tenets accepted by the great majority of biologists." (p. 251, Nov., 1957 ,Scientific Monthly). "The idea (of spontaneous generation of life). . . .seems a necessary part of the evolutionary concept."
In answer to the question as to how spontaneous generation was possible, they glibly say, "The general answer is that the conditions no longer exist which once made the spontaneous generation of life possible. . . .Admittedly (it is not likely that) the precise chain of molecular reactions from which life first arose will ever (again) be established. In the nature of things, "proof" will be impossible forever." (Ibid).
In "The Science of Life," by Wells and Huxley, they say: "It is much more likely that at one moment in earth's cooling down, the warm seas provided an environment never afterwards to be repeated, an environment differing in the temperature, in pressure, in the salts within the waters, in the gases of the atmosphere over the waters, from any earlier or later environment. The earth AT THAT MOMENT fulfilled all the conditions which the alchemists tried to repeat in the crucibles. It was a cosmic test tube whose particular brew led to the appearance of living matter."
How can an intelligent person believe that life could be produced spontaneously FROM A LIFELESS EARTH, AND SEA, but recently cooled off from the intense heat of molten rocks? And remember, that sterilized earth had NONE of the "highly complicated proteins" essential to life! Could that sterile environment do what modern man with his vast knowledge of chemistry and physics and his well-equipped laboratories has failed to do?
Scientists who are more realistic inform us that "creating life" is much more than just pulling a live bacteria out of the lifeless seas (that had been sterilized for ages by the intense early heat on earth of many thousands of degrees). One such scientist says,
"If genes are required to produce enzymes (and they are), then LIFE BEGAN ONLY WHEN THEY (genes and enzymes) BEGAN. . . . The material of life as we know it could have come into being ONLY in a complex chemical environment." (including the highly complex proteins, which come only from antecedent life - Editor). (The Gene," by Norman H. Horowitz, Scientific American). "Under present day conditions, the capacity to synthesize these molecules (complicated 'macromolecules' - protein molecules) from simpler substances remains one of the supremely distinguishing capacities of cells." (P. 52, Scientific American, 9-'61). This is a technical way of saying that "spontaneous generation in the world as it is today is impossible. Living cells alone can make protein molecules."
Materialistic evolutionists say that in the remote and misty ages of the past there MUST have been spontaneous generation of life. But the conditions that made spontaneous generation possible then DO NOT EXIST NOW (even though we have a liveable world now and it was a dead world then). SO IT WILL BE FOREVER IMPOSSIBLE TO PROVE THEIR THEORY. Is that science? Or, is it superstition? Superstition it is, as crass and crude as any superstition that awes the mind of the West Indies Creole voodooist, or the African witch doctor.
Why is it that millions of otherwise intelligent students today are deceived by a theory that admittedly CAN NOT BE PROVED, and is based entirely upon suppositions of what might have happened ages ago, but for which there is no proof whatsoever?
Commenting on the inability of modern science to produce life in a test tube, without antecedent life, Prof. L. Victor Cleveland says:
"Today, using heat, cold, X-rays, sunlight, radiations from nuclear products, chemicals, experiments galore, NOTHING REVEALS THE DEAD AS GIVING BIRTH TO LIFE, the inorganic becoming organic, except as the miracle and mystery of the living thing itself turns the inorganic into the organic. So far as all the scientists of earth can prove, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS SPONTANEOUS GENERATION or abiogenesis - life must come from antecedent life. Life produces life of the same kind, whether you look at protozoa or elephants."
Scores of qualified, noted scientists have borne testimony to the fact that "NOT A SINGLE EXAMPLE OF SPONTANEOUS GENERATION HAS BEEN WITNESSED SINCE THE DAWN OF SCIENTIFIC OBSERVATION."
Norman H. Horowitz, writing in a recent issue of the "Scientific American," says, "Bacteria, as we know, arise only from pre-existing bacteria. We can prepare a broth that contains all of the raw materials needed for the production of bacteria, and we can provide all the necessary environmental conditions - acidity, temperature, oxygen supply, and so on - but if we fail to inoculate the broth with at least one bacteria cell, THEN NO BACTERIA WILL EVER BE PRODUCED IN IT," (The same is true of every other form of life, from the minutest virus to the most complex animal).
The "secret" of life is in God and God's Son, the Eternal Word.
"In the beginning was the Word (Gr., Logos), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . .All things were made by Him. . . .In Him was LIFE." (John 1:1-3).
And speaking of microscopic life (bacteria) as Mr. Horowitz does in the quotation given above, we are reminded that
"Bacteria are actually just as complex as any cell of our own bodies, and their spontaneous origin from non-living material is not much more likely than the spontaneous generation of scorpions." (Ibid).
According to this authority, it is as likely that a scorpion (or any other complex animal) could be produced by "spontaneous generation" as that a bacterium (which also is highly complex) should be produced by spontaneous generation!
Consider again the extreme complexity of protein molecules, viruses, bacteria, and somatic cells - and remember, they are all microscopic! How could such involved, infinitestimal, complicated working units - all living units - come into being by chance. All of us know, it takes intelligence, knowledge and skill of a high order to produce modern, complex machines, such as electronic computers, accelerators, high-powered microscopes, etc. All of us should know it took supreme Intelligence to create the amazing somatic cells, the incredible viruses, the astounding protein molecules, and the amazing bacteria. GOD is the Master Workman who designed and created all these wonders!
Chapter 6.
THE WITNESS OF "DESIGN" AND "ADAPTATIONS"
TO THE FACT OF DIVINE CREATION
"Adaptation" and "Design" are phenomena of nature that prove the presence of a Superintending Mind. "Design demands a Designer." The millions of odd shapes and differing habits of the plants and animals making up the teeming populations of creation were all cleverly designed to enable each species to live and survive and to reproduce its kind in a very complicated world. C. H. Waddington, writing in the Scientific American, describes "Adaptations" in these words:
"Every kind of creature is endowed with or develops qualities - we call them 'adaptations' - which are neatly tailored to the requirements of its special mode of life." He mentions the mystery and miracle inherent in such "adaptations;" "How these adaptations come (or came) into being is one of the oldest and still one of the thorniest problems of biology. . . . Darwin argued that the whole of evolution depends on RANDOM CHANGES in the hereditary constitution and the selection of helpful changes by the environment. If a change, which we nowadays call a gene mutation, happens to make an animal better adapted and thus more efficient, that animal will leave more offspring than its fellows and the new type of gene will increase in frequency until it finally supplants the old."
Recognizing that many will question the adequacy of Darwin's theory of "RANDOM CHANGES" to account for the marvels of "design" and "adaptations," Theodosius Dobzhansky, another writer in the Scientific American, says:
"Perhaps the most troublesome problem in the theory of evolution today is the question of HOW THE HAPHAZARD PROCESS OF CHANCE MUTATION and natural selection could have produced some of the wonderfully complicated adaptations in nature. Consider, for instance, the structure of the human eye - a most intricate system composed of a great number of exquisitely adjusted and co-ordinated parts. COULD SUCH A SYSTEM HAVE ARISEN MERELY BY THE GRADUAL ACCUMULATION OF HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF LUCKY, INDEPENDENT MUTATIONS?" (Caps ours). "Some people believe this is asking too much for 'natural selection' to accomplish, and they have offered other explanations." (Dr. Dobzhansky himself believes in the theory of evolution; but at least he raises the question and shows that many do NOT consider Darwinism or any other theory of evolution as giving an adequate explanation of the fact of adaptations in nature).
Personally, we think it is absurd to believe that "RANDOM CHANGES" can account for the marvelous "adaptations" and "design" found in nature. The only explanation that meets the demands of reason is the fact of Divine Creation.
Perfect "adaptations" are the rule of life. "Always, wherever an animal appears it comes perfectly equipped for the sphere in which its life is to be lived."
Evolution claims that the myriads of forms of life, each with its perfect adaptations, came about GRADUALLY. This confronts the thinker with an impossible situation. Here is the argument:
Evolution teaches that fish evolved from lower animals. How did they get fins? No evolutionist claims that fins came in one generation, but rather in many generations. In other words, the development of fins was a GRADUAL development. And from where did birds get their wings? No evolutionist claims that wings came in one generation, but rather in many generations. They claim that the development of wings was through a very slow, gradual process. Now when the process, let us say, was half way complete, the "fin" or the "wing," as the case may be, would be useless - good for nothing - for a fish cannot swim with a part-fin nor can a bird fly with a part-wing! A part-fin or a part-wing, would be a monstrosity, not a perfect adaptation such as we see everywhere in nature. NOWHERE IN THE WORLD TODAY CAN ONE FIND PARTLY DEVELOPED APPENDAGES OR ORGANS, but, rather, everywhere there is perfect adaptation, perfect development for its intended purpose. That fact proves that EACH CREATURE, IN ALL ESSENTIAL FEATURES, HAS BEEN EXACTLY AS IT IS NOW, and was so created in the beginning.
Think for a moment of the trunk of an elephant; it is perfectly adapted to the use the elephant puts it. Having 20,000 muscles, the trunk of an elephant has great versatility. With it he can lift a peanut to enjoy, or lift and crush to the ground a 600 pound tiger. He can twist his trunk in every direction; and its sensitive end is endowed with such a delicate sense of touch that he can pick up even a small pin from the ground at his feet! But what good would a "partially developed" trunk be?
What good to an eagle would a "partly developed" wing be? Everything in nature is perfect for the purpose and environment for which each creature was created. Anything less than perfection would be useless. On the very surface, the theory of evolution proves itself to be a nightmare, an impossible theory that does NOT fit the facts of a world that functions as this one does. For a workable world, it is absolutely necessary that all living things be created perfect!
"Adaptations" Everywhere!
The teeth of carnivores (flesh eaters - dogs, wolves, tigers, lions, hyenas, etc). are especially adapted to seizing and rending prey. The South American anteater, on the other hand, has NO teeth, but a long snout, at the end of which is a small, toothless mouth with a tiny slit as the opening. The tongue of the anteater is a tubular affair about eighteen inches long that can be used either to pick up ants off the ground or in the passageways of ant colonies. Think for a moment: what good on earth would an anteater's snout be if it were only partly developed? Imagine a monstrous creature, with a few deformed canine teeth in a half-developed snout, with a tongue not fully adapted to picking up ants! Such "messes" would wreck the world of nature in one generation, if they prevailed. In nature any imperfection is like an incomplete bridge.
Hugo de Vries aptly said, "Natural selection may explain the survival of the fittest, but it cannot explain the arrival of the fittest."
Other writers have sensed this preposterous absurdity in the theory of evolution. Dr. Criswell says,
"Take a spider. In the posterior region of the spider are highly specialized organs for the spinning of a web. He spins the web in order to gain food to eat - in his peculiar way. Now, in the millions, and millions, and millions of years it took for those modifications in the posterior regions of the spider to develop into those highly specialized organs, so he could spin a web, so he could catch his food, why did he not starve to death while those organs were developing so he could spin his web?" (Did Man Just Happen?)
Obviously, all specialized organs, such as the trunk of an elephant, the spinning apparatus of a spider, the eye of an eagle, the retractable claws of the tiger, the beak of a woodpecker, the tongue of an anteater, the quills of a porcupine, HAD to be created perfect and suddenly - otherwise they would never serve their intended purpose. The evolutionary idea of gradual development through "random changes" through long ages of time can in no wise account for the facts of a practical, workable world.
"ADAPTATIONS" AND "DESIGN" SEEN IN PLANTS
In the whole panorama of plant life there are literally millions of special "adaptations" and evidences of special "design." We select but a few that illustrate this point - "Design" demands a Designer of Intelligence; and "Adaptations" have to come SUDDENLY and be PERFECT to accomplish their purpose, and that eliminates the preposterous idea of "random changes" through long periods of time as an explanation for adaptations.
Who gave cacti and other succulent plants of arid regions their unbelievable ability to store enough water during the rainy season to carry them through the many dry months? Most plants lose gallons of water daily through their leaves - but not the cactus; it has no leaves. The swollen stems function to carry on the process of food-making, and water storage. Who put the spines on cacti to protect them from being eaten by foraging animals? And who left the spines off other plants, so foraging animals could have food? Do cacti have the intelligence or the foresight to protect themselves from raiding animals? To ask the question is to answer it: the wisdom in evidence is NOT in the plant, but in the God who created the plants as well as the animals, and Who designed all things to fit into a perfect, workable economy.
Who designed the arrangement of leaves on such native trees as the beech, elm, oak and chestnut, to secure a maximum amount of sunlight for all leaves? The leaves are arranged on the vertical shoots in spirals so that any given leaf does not shade the leaf next below it on the shoot. That is the result of INTELLIGENCE - not "random chance" or "chance mutations." In a case like this, where the individual members of the plant seem concerned with the welfare of the entire tree, one must presuppose "actual foresight," which is NOT as asset of mindless plants.
Who shaped the leaves of the teasel and compass plants so that both rainwater and dew are retained at the bottom of the leaves in a little cup, long after evaporation would have dried the leaves were they not so shaped?
Who anticipated the need of the morning glory, when the bee makes a sudden crash landing in its open mouth, for strength for its delicate flowers to handle the impact? The five corrugated blades of the flower that radiate upward from the stem, held together by tissue - thin curved sheets - take the blow easily without injury to the flower and enable the flower to deliver nectar and pollen, according to plan.
Who designed the walnut shell, making it hard to crack, so preserving at least some of the walnuts to serve as SEED for other trees, and guarantee the cycle of life? A walnut shell is most interesting. An Engineer of great ability had to figure out the design, which no man yet has been able to improve on "to get strength without weight." To its naturally rigid dome shape is added a compression ring around the middle. Then the surface to the shell is heavily corrugated so it can not be dented. Inside, two tension plates at right angles - the whole thing being very light weight material - give still more rigidity!
Who gave countless plants their hairy stems and branches to keep off pilfering ants and beetles? This is another case of obvious foresight, which plants do not posses. Who thought of the idea of giving milkweeds, wild lettuce and dandelions a white, sticky milky sap, and made the surface tissue tender, so that when ants and beetles seek to climb up the plants, their pick-like claws pierce the tender tissue, letting a tiny droplet of sticky "milk" gush out? Soon the legs of the unwanted insects become covered with the sticky adhesive and further progress for them becomes difficult - and the trespassers retire in disgust.
"Adaptations" and "Design" seen in Insects.
Insect structures show vast variations - hundreds of thousands. The grasshopper's leg was designed for jumping; the leg of the diving beetle for swimming; the leg of the bumblebee for carrying pollen: and in each case the leg is perfectly adapted to its intended use.
The tongues of some moths and butterflies are as long as their bodies. The nectar, which is their food, is produced in the deep, hidden pockets (nectaries) of flowers. By unrolling the tongue and thrusting it into the far recesses of the flower, the insect is able to reach the nectar and suck it up. Commenting on this amazing fact, one evolutionist says,
"This long tube has been developed in the course of ages from the jaws of the insect." (Article on "Butterflies and Moths").
A partly-evolved sucking tongue would be useless; such a tongue is of no use whatever unless and until it is PERFECTED FOR THE JOB IT MUST DO. Surely no thinking person can be so foolish as to believe that such an intricate instrument as the long sucking tube of the butterfly, which it neatly curls up when not in use, was the product of "development through the course of ages."
Who gave locusts their "automatic stabilizer" (an aerodynamic sense organ, surrounded by hairs on the front and top of the insect's head)? and who devised an automatic "gyroscope" (club like structures called "halters") for flies? During flight the
"tips of the halters swing to and fro in the arc of a circle. When the fly is turned off its course, the halters continue to swing in the same plane as before the turn, on the principle of a gyroscope" (Smithsonian Institute Report, 1954).
What mechanical genius devised the wings of Glossina palpalis (tsetse-fly) that beat 120 times per second - and arranged the timing of the beat so that the wing actually rests three-fourths of that time! (rest periods between each beat). If that is startling, think of Who is able to create wings for the tiny midge (an insect less than one-tenth of an inch long) that beat 2,000 times per second! (Nature Parade).
Miracles galore mark the "Nature Parade!"
Who first instructed the water spider in the art of making and using a "diving bell?"
"The tiny, inverted nest of silk is anchored firmly underwater - a watertight air chamber. the spider then fills it with air by trapping a bubble between its hind legs; the air in this bubble is released into the nest. Fresh air is brought down to this 'diving bell' as often as required until the family is raised."
Who designed the amazing architecture of the grasshopper's hind legs? Graham Hoyle, writing in a recent issue of the Scientific American, describes the astonishing mechanism.
"The grasshopper's jump is one of the most remarkable performances in the biological world. The little animal can leap about 10 times its body length in a vertical jump or 20 times its length (almost one meter) horizontally. . . .The grasshopper weighs only two grams, and its leg muscle is only 1/25th of a gram. . . . but the tiny muscle exerts the astonishing power of some 20,000 grams per gram of its own weight (10 times that developed by the muscles of man). Two features of MECHANICAL DESIGN account for the efficiency and enormous power of the grasshopper's jumping muscle. First, the muscle fibers are very short - about 1.5 millimeters, or one-twentieth of an inch. Secondly, they are arranged like the fibrils of a feather along the whole length of the femur, attached to the external skeleton of the insect's leg and to a long, broad tendon inside the leg. Thus the load is distributed evenly over the whole limb. Such an even distribution is impossible in a vertebrate structure."
Who gave to the bombardier beetle the formula for its poison gas? In its body it secretes a foul-smelling liquid which turns into a vapor as it is discharged from two glands near the anus. There is a sound like the explosion of a tiny pop-gun as the gas attack is launched against its enemy!
Who gave the strange Ichneumon fly (Thalessa) a drill, about 4½ inches long? The Thalessa "bores into WOOD and lays its eggs." Moreover, the female Thalessa lays her egg near the larvae of the Tremex. When the Ichneumon larva hatches, it attaches itself to the Tremex larva and feeds greedily on it.
Who first suggested to balloon spiders that they spin parachutes of silk which they use to transport themselves across fields, or as far as a hundred miles away? And who gave the water spiders the ingenuity to build tiny rafts, held together by the silk they spin, and on which they sail over the surfaces of ponds or calm streams?
Who equipped the water-scorpion with a snorkel-type tube so that it can breathe fresh air while submerged?
Who taught the tent caterpillar to use guide lines which it spins and lays down as it travels from branch to branch on an apple tree? By following these lines in the evening it finds its way back to its nest!
Who gave the female mosquito such an elaborate "surgical kit" that she can drill through skin and get her fill of blood?
"Nature has fitted the mosquito with a perfect midget tool kit. It is carried in the beak, which is a long, slender sort of nose. The tools are sheathed in a well fitting pocket of soft skin which is really the mosquito's lower lip. Inside the cover are six long neat tools, a pair of saws, a pair of lancets, a syringe and a syphon. . . . And in the mosquito's head, placed where they can see and supervise the drilling operation, is a pair of compound eyes. . . . We are not 'bitten' by a mosquito. The thirsty little monsters have no teeth. The damage is done with a tool kit." It literally cuts a disc out of the victim's skin.
And all this was achieved by "RANDOM CHANGES?" Tell me, thinking reader. HOW MANY BILLIONS OF YEARS WOULD BE REQUIRED "ACCIDENTLY" TO develop such a minute, intricate kit of surgical instruments - plus the 'know-how' given to the mosquito to use the kit? And, remember, if such a marvel were developed step by step - it would be useless until perfected! Who is so naive as to believe such puerile nonsense ?
For unparalleled ingenuity, though, one must study the hunting wasp. Let us examine the procedure used by the Odynerus hunting wasp. We quote from the book, "The Hunting Wasp."
"Odynerus (hunting wasp) makes and cements a horizontal cell, broad at one end and narrow at the other. From the ceiling of the broad end she hangs a silken thread and on the end of this thread, in mid-air, she suspends her egg. Under the egg she places two or three caterpillars, and in the narrow part of the cell she places a lot more - about twenty - jammed together so that they cannot move or wriggle away. What happens? The egg splits and a tiny yellow larva emerges. It does not fall to the ground but hangs from the end of the shell of the egg, and its weight lengthens the thread. The larva stretches its little head down and takes a small bite out of one of the recumbent forms below.
"These (stored) caterpillars are not dead; they have not been treated too severely and are not inert. Observers have found that, at a touch, up will go their tails. They have in fact only been treated in the head end. So, on the bite (from the hunting wasp larva) being taken, the caterpillar rears and the scared lava streaks up its thread out of harm's way. By and by, when all is quiet again, it steals down and takes another bite and the caterpillar rears as before. As the caterpillar weakens with this treatment the grub grows stronger. In twenty-four hours it has eaten the first caterpillar, and starts on the next. With the body of a whole caterpillar inside it, it is of course, larger and stronger" and soon it is able fearlessly to tackle and devour, one by one, its remaining stock of caterpillars - all kept as fresh meat until eaten, by the neat process of the mother wasp's stinging the victim in one segment only - so paralyzing it but not killing it! (P. 176).
Generation after generation - without change - the Odynerus hunting wasp goes through this procedure. Such miracles can not be explained by evolution, or "chance mutation" or "random change," or any other theory that leaves God out. The very intricacy of the scheme used by this wasp demands that some superior Intelligence devised the entire thing, and created the wasp with those strange, yet practical, habits that provide so uniquely for its offspring.
Some will ask, Is God then the author of such schemes that involve the killing and eating of one form of life by another? True, this is an effective way of keeping over-population of animals in check. We must also remember that we are living in a world judged by reason of the Fall of man (see Genesis 3:14-19). Death is the wage of sin - and the animal creation suffers with mankind in the judgments of God on sin. We read of this "sympathetic" suffering in Romans 8:
"For creation was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope.
"Because the creation itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
"For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now." (Verses 20-22)>
"Food chains" are a part of God's creation, in a world under the "curse" of sin. Birds can eat worms and insects; foxes and wolves eat rabbits; large fish eat small fish, etc. And all life - plant and animal - eventually ends in death, so reflecting the judgment of death God has placed on mankind because of sin (see Romans 5:12; 6:23).
Vast changes will take place at the second advent of Christ, when the present "curse" on creation will be removed. then Edenic conditions will be restored and the nature of wild animals will be subdued (see Isaiah 11:6-9; Romans 8:19, 23).
Chapter 7.
The Perfect "BALANCE" and Universal "INTERDEPENDENCE" of All Life on Earth Witness to the Superintendent of a MASTER MIND.
All life on earth forms a wonderful unit. In nature are found many "checks and counterchecks" which keep the so-called "Balance in Nature." Bats and birds keep insects in check; large fish eat the more prolific small fish; hawks keep down the mouse population - and in a thousand other ways the "Balance in Nature" is maintained.
Here are some links in the so-called "food chain;" the worm is eaten by the frog; the frog in turn is eaten by the snake; the snake is eaten by the hawk.
Another "food chain" is in the sea. One authority says,
"Ten thousand pounds of diatoms are eaten to make 1,000 pounds of copepods; 1,000 pounds of copepods when eaten produce 100 pounds of smelts, 100 pounds of smelts, when consumed produce 10 pounds of mackerel; the ten pounds of mackerel when eaten by tuna make one pound of tuna. Caught, canned and eaten by man, one pound of tuna increases man's body weight by one-tenth of a pound." Such "food chains" not only illustrate the way "balance" is maintained in nature, but also the interdependence of all life.
"Nature's world," says Robert S. Lemmon, writing in Nature's Wonders, "is peopled by no random assemblage of isolated, unrelated forms of life jumbled together without rhyme or reason. Rather, it is an inconceivably vast and integrated organization, a network composed by myriads of. . . vital connecting strands."
"The living things of a community," says another author, "form a natural balance, which is often upset but just as often restored. . . . If we consider the living world we see a vast number of species, animal and vegetable, high and low, some numerous, some scarce, some spread everywhere, others confined to limited parts of the earth. On the whole, these proportions, numbers and particular distribution of species remain constant; there is a balance maintained between them which we are wont to call the, 'BALANCE OF NATURE.' " (Book of Popular Science).
The major controls in nature that are used to maintain this "balance" are (1) predators; (2) starvation; (3) disease; (4) weather hazards (such as extreme cold or heat). All four of course result in the death of the members of a population that get too numerous.
Animal and Plant Characteristics are given by the Creator
Though Dr. Irston Barnes, president of the Audubon Society of Washington,
D. C., does not give the Creator the credit, he speaks of the "fixity of character" in animals and plants that assures the maintenance of the "balance in nature." He says,
"Each animal is chained . . . to an instinctive pattern of behaviour . . . . Thus a hawk is powerless to alter its tastes or its manners. This dictate of nature asserts that each form of life shall fulfill its destiny, that no chaos of individual choices shall destroy nature's balance. . . . Each form of life has its essential role in a community."
If each animal is "chained to an instinctive pattern of behaviour," then all life is static - and evolution is ruled out.
Such an intricate system in nature could NOT have been evolved by "blind chance." It demands a thinking, planning Architect who is both all-wise and all-powerful to put it into effect.
"Handicaps" and "Safeguards"
the Creator's Hand can easily be seen also in the many "handicaps" and "safeguards" found in nature. "Balance" in nature is maintained by the "handicaps" placed on certain creatures that otherwise would kill off all weaker species. The poisonous snake might become a great threat to all other forms of life, were it not handicapped by having to grovel along the ground without feet. Poisonous snakes in India also have a natural enemy - the mongoose. The stronger predators like tigers and lions breed more slowly than the prolific smaller animals, such as rabbits, that are eaten in large numbers by other predators such as foxes and wolves.
Certain "safeguards" also are given to forms of life that otherwise would be at a great disadvantage in the struggle for existence. The cactus is provided with spines; some plants have a strong poison in their leaves; other plants are protected by disagreeable odors; the sloe turtle is placed in a heavy armored plate; the small fish are very prolific; the dumb porcupine is given quills. All such ingenious devices - handicaps and safeguards - are evidence of a Creator who put each form of life here to perform a predetermined function in the scheme of things. To do this successfully, someone had to have an over-all view of things, with sufficient knowledge to plan an integrated whole, with all parts functioning together, and supplied with the right checks and balances so that no one section of life would wipe out the rest. Only GOD could do that!
"Balance" Maintained in the Insect World
Insects multiply at an unbelievable rate. For example, a female house-fly can lay 500 eggs in one season. Each egg develops into an adult fly in one week. Each of these adult female flies can then lay 500 eggs of its own. If all eggs hatch and if all the newly hatched survive, the original fly would have some 200,000,000,000,000,000,000 descendants at the end of the season! That means little to the average person - the number is simply too big to be comprehended; so let us state it this way:
"If all the offspring of a single pair of common house flies lived to mature and reproduce, the earth would be blanketed beneath a layer of flies nearly fifty feet deep in less then six months!" (U.S.D.A. Year Book).
One great enemy of insects is the spider.
"The insects - with nearly a million different kinds - might dominate the land if the arachnids (spiders and their relatives) were not pitted against them. From time immemorial spiders and their clan have killed and eaten insects of all kinds and sizes. One female spider is reported to have destroyed 250 house flies, 33 fruit flies . . .during its lifetime. . . .More than 60,000 different species of arachnids are known, and they live about us in vast numbers. An Englishman calculated that there 'are probably more than 50,000 spiders per acre in England.' " ("Spiders and Their Relatives").
In a thousand other ways, "insects are pitted against insects" to keep the populations of insects in control. For example, "the horse guard (a wasp) kills horse flies; the Microgaster (ichneumon) helps preserve our cabbage gardens from destruction by the larvae of the cabbage butterfly; the "lady bug" beetles (called the bete a Dieux - God's creature - by the French) destroy destructive garden aphids by the millions; a tiny wasp (Apanteles medicaginis) each year saves thousands of acres of alfalfa by preying on the caterpillar population that destroys alfalfa; and so the story goes.
Birds and small animals too are pitted against insects.
One toad will eat as many as 30 flies an hour; and a giant toad was observed snapping up mosquitoes at the rate of 50 a minute. A swallow will devour as many as 2,000 mosquitoes per day, in addition to large numbers of flies and other insects. Some birds, like the wren, will destroy their own weight of pestiferous insects and larvae in one day. If God had not provided such "hungry" insect eaters, disaster would soon overtake the world. Birds as a whole are God's agents, His "police," to keep insects and weeds in check. (They keep weeds in check by eating the weed seeds).
"We have birds for every place where insects and worms might be found. Up in the air we see Swallows. Swifts and the Martins catching flying insects as they sail along. These birds have wide mouths so they can catch flies, bugs and beetles as they fly. At a little lower level we have Kingbirds, Flycatchers, Woodpeckers and others darting out of trees to chase passing insects. In the treetops Warblers and Flycatchers take care of the insects. Birds like the Sparrows and the Maryland Yellowthroats take care of the insects in the bushes. The Quail, Robin and Meadowlark, and many others, make their meals of insects and worms they find on the ground. Snipes, Sandpipers and Herons are the "waders" on stilt-like legs walking around, catching insects along the shores of lakes and streams. Ducks, Geese and others guard the surface of the waters and dig into the mud to keep insects and worms from over multiplying . . . .It has been said that if birds were taken from this world, IN LESS THAN ONE YEAR NEARLY ALL PLANTS WOULD BE DESTROYED BY INSECTS. Birds spend most of their life hunting for food." (School Textbook). *
* There is a rather large group of small animals (the insectivores) that specializes in eating insects. It includes the hedgehogs, shrews, moles, tenrecs and solendons. they are active mostly at night, and consume enormous quantities of insects.
What a thorough job the Creator did in providing birds for EVERY ENVIRONMENT - air, earth, water and under the water - to keep down the insect population! EVOLUTION COULD NOT BE RIGHT - for if insects had arrived as little as three years before birds, their destroyers, all the earth would have been denuded of vegetation and so all higher forms of life would have been impossible. In fact, insects would eat themselves out of food, and literally destroy themselves! One can easily see that it was absolutely necessary, as the Bible teaches (Genesis 1) for ALL LIFE ON EARTH, WITH NATURE'S MARVELOUS SYSTEM OF CHECKS AND BALANCES TO HAVE BEEN CREATED AT ABOUT THE SAME TIME. It has been truly said,
"Many minds have overlooked the fact that if life had evolved on the earth without a Master Mind it would have evolved its own destroyers" (Dr. B. H. Shadduck).
And if insect would stop eating insect, it would take only ONE year to upset the balance, and "in a single season insects would denude all living plant life from our planet" (Science Digest). One can not help seeing the Hand of the Creator and the Mind of the Supreme Being behind His creation.
What Keeps the Seas From Overflowing with Life?
Near the surface, the ocean waters will produce "400 million diatoms per cubic yard." What keeps the oceans from becoming clogged with diatoms? A small copepod will have about 120,000 diatoms in its stomach; then the herring comes along and eats 6,000 copepods at a feeding; that takes care of getting rid of the surplus diatoms - the "hay" of the sea.
A codfish will release 4,000,000 eggs in a season, an oyster 100 million, and a sunfish 300 million! How is it that the ocean is not soon filled to overflowing with oysters? or sunfish? For the simple reason that many fish eat these eggs by the hundreds - and so the "balance" of life in the oceans is maintained. This shows the handiwork of an all wise Creator.
How Rats, Mice and other Small Animals are kept in Check
One of the most fascinating of African birds is the secretary bird. It stands about three feet tall. Stalking through the bush, it captures and eats snakes, scorpions and lizards. Our American roadrunner bird does the same in our Southwest.
"One pair of meadow mice could be responsible for one million offspring within a year, if their fecundity were not disturbed. Nature has wisely provided controls for the mouse population. Not only birds of prey, but a wide variety of mammals eat mice as staple food."
Rats also are exceedingly prolific; they generally bear five or six litters a year, with an average of ten young in each litter.
"Fortunately for us, rats and mice have a great many enemies. These enemies include mammals such as foxes, coyotes, badgers, skunks, weasels and wild cats; birds such as hawks, owls, crows and ravens; and reptiles, such as snakes and certain lizards."
The barn owl has aptly been termed "a living mouse trap" - it eats so many mice. Now here is a revealing fact:
"Owl breeding closely follows the mouse population. In seasons when mice are abundant, tawny owls attempt to rear TWO broods instead of one."
Anteaters eat ants; *
* Loren C. Eiseley, Professor of anthropology at the University of Pennsylvania, calls attention to this fact: "Consider the disaster that would overtake an animal like the tubular-mouthed toothless anteater if extinction overtook the social insects (ants and termites). The anteater could never re-adjust. He would starve in the midst of food everywhere available to the less specialized. He will last only as long as his strange environmental niche remains undisturbed." (Nov. 1950, Scientific American).
this is an indirect admission that evolution won't work. Dr. Eiseley knows that any radical re-adjustment necessary to save the anteaters if their present food supply failed, would have to be immediate - and evolution does not work that fast. (or at all) Typists note.
owls eat mice; birds eat insects; spiders devour insects; ladybugs eat aphids; big fish eat little fish. The entire self-regulating system shows a Master Mind behind the whole scheme of things.
Nature's "Undertakers"
Plants and animals live and die. If there were not some means of clearing the earth of lifeless tissues, life on earth would soon become impossible, for undecayed leaves, branches, and corpses of animals would pile up and choke out all possibility of new life. God has, in His economy for nature, created a number of "undertakers" who take care of the dead. In His employ, at this lowly yet necessary work, are bacteria, fungi (molds), the Necrophorus beetle, vultures, hyenas, and others.
Bacteria and fungi are great agents of decay. They reduce anything that dies to simple chemical substances that can then be used by green plants.
"Many molds are equipped with a powerful arsenal of enzymes which bring about the rapid decomposition of woody plant materials. Fungi rot leaves, dead branches and tree trunks. In so doing they build up the humus layer and enrich the soil for future generations of trees."
Since bacteria and fungi depend for their food on dead tissues of plants and animals, we see another illustration of "interdependence" as we as "maintaining balance."
The Necrophorus beetle, popularly called the sexton, is invaluable as one of God's undertakers. Working mostly at night, it will bury a small dead animal, such as a rabbit - than use it for food for itself and its offspring. It clears the surface of the ground of what would soon become a foul-smelling, unsightly cadaver.
The bluebottle flies are also on "Nature's payroll as qualified undertakers." They and their grubs help dissolve the meat of corpses, such as dead horses and cows or other animals that would soon fill the earth unless disposed of quickly. Bluebottle grubs, by the thousands, live on putrefying flesh and help get it our of the way. These grubs "exude a liquid of great potency" that dissolves the meat; for the grubs can eat only "liquid" foods.
God who planned all things to keep nature solvent and liveable, created these humble "undertakers" for a distinct purpose in the scheme of things. And, He created them without the possibility of "evolving" into something else - their station in life is static. In fact, ALL life is limited by the laws of the Creator to reproduce "after its kind," and only after its kind. In that way the Creator, who planned every form and phase of life, keeps the "balance of nature."
Vultures and a few other birds such as Marabou storks that live on carrion are also God's "undertakers." They have a keen sense of smell and extraordinary vision, for "the smallest dead snake or mouse does not escape detection by these birds several hundred feet up in the air." After the vultures have cleaned off the flesh from a dead animal, hyenas (in some areas of the world) come along, crack open the bones and eat the marrow. This hastens the decay of the bones, and adds greatly to the accomplishing of the gruesome task assigned to God's "undertakers" of clearing the ground of the corpses of animals.
Nothing was forgotten, nothing was neglected, in the "scheme of things" to keep nature solvent and keep one phase of life (or death) from destroying the rest.
The Interdependence of All Life
Not only is there designed "balance in nature" that keeps nature solvent and functioning century after century, but also all life is "mutually dependent." As an illustration, let us take Darwin's classic example of the effect of cats on red clover in England.
"If field mice are not kept in check by cats, the nests of bumble bees would be destroyed by too many mice. With no bumble bees the red clover could not be fertilized, and would soon die out."
Species serve one another, as is the case of the birds that eat stone-fruit, thus obtaining food, and effecting thereby a scattering of the seeds - so serving by scattering the very species it attacks! small creatures like squirrels are the means of planting many of our large forests; they eat some of the nuts, and scatter others in their travels from tree to tree. They often bury nuts in the Fall and neglect to dig them up later. Here is another illustration:
"Vast numbers of one-celled plants (fungi) and animals (protozoa) live in the stomachs of cattle and obtain nourishment from the contents of the digestive organs; at the same time they break down the cellulose in the plants on which the cows feed, and as a result the cows are able to make use of the various nutritive elements contained in the cellulose."
Speaking of this fact of interdependence in nature, one authority says,
"The variety of interplay between the great branches of the living world is endless and inexhaustible. We need only to recall two salient illustrations: (1) the formation by plants of chemical compounds which animals can consume; and (2) the formation by animals of carbon dioxide which they pour into the air, and which is a source of food for all the higher forms of plants. Thus plants serve animals; and animals, though absolutely dependent on plants, serve plants."
Animals breathe oxygen and exhale carbon dioxide; green plants (in sunlight) take in carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Without plants in the world the time would soon come when all animals and all men would use up the available oxygen in the air and would perish." *
* "Give the plants a free hand and the water would in time become so alkaline as to destroy them. Give the animals a free hand and they, in the end, would be killed by the acidity they themselves produced; but the two working against one another insure the maintenance of conditions vital to both. All life is like that: a thousand interacting and balanced forces, like the flying buttresses of a towering Gothic Cathedral; destroy one and the whole graceful fabric comes down in irreparable ruin." (Creation's Amazing Architect).
Miracles of Interdependence seen in Cross Pollination
Flowers supply bees with nectar; bees in turn transfer pollen from one flower to another, thus preserving the life of the species.
The late Dr. Arthur I. Brown said, "God devised a curious and altogether marvelous plan whereby pollen dust would be carried to the proper destination and reach its appointed place safely. He called on the insect world to help with the job. Bees, among insects, are His chief agents, and naturally the Creator, wishing to bring them to the flowers, gave the flowers color and fragrance as definite attractions, along with nectar for food for the bees, also to attract them."
Bees, with their long slender tongues, can reach the nectar, but most other insects can not. Writing on "The Fertilization of Flowers" in June, 1951 Scientific American, Verne Grant tells an intriguing story.
"As the bee takes the nectar, its body hairs inevitably pick up pollen from the flowers stamens. In some bee flowers the stamens have special lever, trigger or piston devices for dusting pollen on some particular spot of the bee's body. When the bee has finished working on one flower, it flies rapidly on to another. BEES HAVE AN INSTINCT TO CONFINE THEIR ATTENTION TO FLOWERS OF ONE SPECIES AT A TIME. . . .This assures that the bee will deliver its load of pollen to another flower of the same species which the pollen can fertilize." (Caps ours).
"Adaptations" and "Design" in the realm of the cross-pollination of flowers are so evident and so truly wonderful that they seem almost unbelievable. The Creator has devised scores of odd means to insure the pollination of certain flowers. We mention some of the more interesting:
Some flowers are pollinated by beetles. "Several of them hold the beetles in a trap while the stigmas receive pollen and the stamens sprinkle a fresh supply onto the bodies of the prisoners. Then they open an exit by which the beetle escapes.
"The flowers pollinated by sunbirds, which settle on the plant, usually stand erect and provide a landing platform. . . .The petals of flowers pollinated by birds are fused into a tube which holds copious quantities of thin nectar. THE PROPORTIONS OF THE TUBE OFTEN CORRESPOND TO THE LENGTH AND CURVATURE OF THE BIRD'S BILL.
"The tree-borne bat flowers of the tropics are large, frequently a dirty white in color and open only at night. (Bats fly about only at night). They attract the bats by a fermenting or fruit-like odor, which is GIVEN OFF AT NIGHT.
"Some flowers are pollinated by flies. Since flies derive their food usually from carrion, dung, humus, etc., THE FLOWERS THAT ATTRACT FLIES CARRY SIMILAR ODORS. . . .Rafflesia, a large blossomed fly-pollinated flower of Malaysia, smells like putrefying flesh; another flower, pollinated by flies, black arum, has the odor of dung; . . . there is a species of Dutchman's-pipe that smells like decaying tobacco." (Ibid). (Caps ours).
Let us give a few more examples, in detail, of the various ways the miracle of cross-pollination is carried out.
"When the beetle Catonia lights on a magnolia flower, its weight springs a trigger-like trap that releases a sudden shower of petals that frightens the insect and causes it to take off to another flower, with pollen from the first flower stuck to its back. When it alights on the next flower its back rubs against the stigma and leaves the pollen where it should be!"
And what can match the resourcefulness displayed in the lovely Iris? Attracted by the beauty of the flower, the bee lights on a flag and follows a distinct line that leads to the nectar well in the center of the flower. As she does so she must move under the drooping stigma which rolls the pollen off her back by a little petal curved downward like a bent finger. When the bee then goes on in to suck the nectar, her back picks up a fresh load of pollen from the anther under which she is forced to stand while sucking nectar. Meanwhile the 'finger' has straightened out and the stigma has moved up out of the way so that the new cargo of pollen cannot be scraped off as the bee backs out - and so self-pollination of the flower is prevented. Neither bee nor flower designed this.
"An example of the perfectly exquisite way in which insects and some flowers are adapted to help each other is seen in cases where the scent of the flower BECOMES OBVIOUS EXACTLY AT THE TIME WHEN THE FLIGHT OF CERTAIN INSECTS BEGINS. Some of the honeysuckles and petunias, which have a very faint smell, or none at all, during the day, are powerfully scented in the hours of the evening, at which time the particular insects which visit them are on the wing.
"Most important 'conveniences' are offered by flowers to their pollen carriers, such as landing platforms or a 'door step' for short-legged insects like bees. . . . Another convenience is guide-lines of different colors which converge and point like so many fingers to the opening that leads to the nectar well. . . ." ("Plants and their Partners").
"Such stories (as quoted above) are limited in number only by the flowers studied, since each one has its own story to tell to eyes keen enough to see. The bleeding heart, the sweet pea, the columbine, the sage, the hollyhock, the laurel, all have very interesting devices for securing cross-pollination and they and their composites have an equally wonderful mutual arrangement." (Ibid).
"And as you study them," writes Rutherford Platt in This Green World, "you cannot help feeling that sense of incredulous awe which prompted Jean Henri Fabre, the Homer of insects, to say of cross-pollination: 'Before these mysteries of life, reason bows and abandons itself to adoration of the Author of these miracles'. "
For such "adaptations" and such miracles of "design" to develop through natural processes - "random changes" - would require billions of years and then could not be developed by mere chance. To believe that evolution developed such marvels is credulity stretched to the point of the preposterous.
The Case of the Yucca and the Pronuba Moth
In all nature there are few cases of such obvious interdependence as exists between the Yucca plant and the Pronuba moth. It is most amazing.
"The yucca is a bright and popular desert flower which seems tough and independent, sending up flowers of white lilies from a cluster of sharp leaves like wicked swords pointing out in all directions. But this beautiful, boastful lily's life hangs on one little white moth that hides underground in the daytime and comes out and flaps around, without ever eating, in the desert night. Yucca buds open at nightfall and pour out their white flowers which, on certain nights, give forth a strong fragrance.
"AT THIS EXACT MOMENT the pronuba moths break out of their cocoons beneath the sand. They struggle up into the air and are led by the odor straight to the flowers. The moth goes to the top of the stamens of the first flower it reaches and scrapes together a wad of pollen three times as big as her head. Carrying this big load in her jaws and tentacles, which are specially enlarged for this purpose, she flies to another yucca plant, Still holding the pollen, she backs down into the bottom of a flower, pierces a hole with her egg-laying needle and lays eggs among the seed cells in the green pod at the base of the pistil.
"Then she climbs to the top of the same pistil where there is a cavity just the right size to receive the wad of pollen. She stuffs this full, pushing down the pollen and padding it to make sure that plenty of pollen tubes will grow quickly and spark the seeds where she has laid her eggs.
"The mother moth plans far ahead. . . .She has deliberately bred the plants so that her babies will have a supply of food when they are born. While the pronuba eggs are getting ready to hatch, the yucca's seeds are ripening. when the moth's larvae (caterpillars) finally emerge from their eggs, they find themselves surrounded by delicious food. They eat their fill of seeds, grow and finally cut a hole through the pod and lower themselves to the ground by spinning a silk thread.
"The mother moth never eats. She just lays eggs, pollinates the yucca to make the seeds ripen, and dies. As the moth, babies eat only about a fifth of the seeds in the pod, the rest of the seeds mature successfully and go on raising more yuccas which in turn will raise more pronubas.
"No one can say how and why this vital partnership of the lily and the moth was planned. WHY DOES THE MOTH COME OUT ON THE NIGHT WHEN THE FLOWERS BLOOM? Why does she do things in the right order? WHAT TELLS HER TO CARRY POLLEN FROM ONE FLOWER TO ANOTHER INSTEAD OF POLLINATING THE SAME FLOWER? What prompts her to work so hard to drive home the pollen in just the right spot? Why don't the caterpillars eat all the seeds? These are just a few of the questions that must go unanswered when we look for reasons in nature's order of things." (Rutherford Platt, in an article on "POLLINATION.") (Caps in quotations are ours). *
* There are other amazing facts not mentioned by Mr. Platt. One is, there are several species of the Yucca plant and each species has its own species of moth. The flower is so constructed that it can only be pollinated by this particular moth - and that moth is as dependent on the yucca plant as the yucca plant is on the moth!
The Pronuba moth "is provided with special tentacles covered with stiff bristles and obviously designed for the purpose of collecting pollen from the anthers of the yucca flowers. . . .There are years in which the yucca plants in a given locality do not flower. . . . It has been observed that in those years when the yucca does not bloom the moths remain dormant in the pupa stage; but when the flowers appear again on the yucca plants THE MOTHS EMERGE AT THE RIGHT TIME TO CARRY ON THEIR PART" in this amazing scheme! This is altogether wonderful, and utterly inexplicable, except on the grounds of DIVINE CREATION, God alone can devise and put into effective operation such miracles!
Mr. Platt may not know the answers to his questions - but the believer in God does. The only possible explanation for such an intricate series of action, in perfect co-ordination between a plant incapable of thinking and a moth incapable of reasoning power or foresight, is that GOD MADE IT SO. And so the little Pronuba moth, and the lovely Yucca plant of the desert are mighty witnesses to the fact that GOD MADE THEM SO. Throughout all creation there are a million voices - voices that rise from the throats of songbirds, insects, animals, flowers and fishes of the sea - that bear testimony to the power and wisdom of God in His magnificent creation.
We would like some evolutionist to answer this question: How could the Yucca plant and the Pronuba moth both evolve, by "chance mutations," "random changes," natural selection, or any other "chance" method, in such a way, and at the same time, so that both organisms were perfected together, to be dependent on each other as completely as are the Yucca plant and the Pronuba moth? Such a relationship of interdependence and helpfulness could not possibly come about except by outside intervention. That intervention was and could only be by One of supreme power and intelligence.
Chapter 8
THE ENDLESS VARIETIES IN NATURE AND THE "PERSISTENCE OF SPECIES," AND THE MANY STRANGE AND ODD
SPECIMENS OF LIFE ARE WITNESSES TO
THE FACT OF DIVINE CREATION
THE WORLD OF NATURE is most fascinating and intriguing, because of the great versatility in creation. The Supreme Architect apparently delighted in creating a well-nigh endless variety of life, including forms of life that are unbelievably odd and so defy explanation. These unusual creatures, and the vast numbers of varieties in life, are in the air, on the land, in the earth, and in the sea. And here is the miracle of this intricate and involved creation: every one of the myriads of forms of life on earth is "whole, complete and perfectly fitted to the environment in which it was made to live and function." Moreover, each distinct genus is essentially static, breeding "after its kind" generation after generation, with absolutely no evidence of transmutation from one genus into another.
The record of prehistoric life in the rocks is the same:
"When a family appears it appears whole and complete and fitted for the environment for which it was made to live" (Did Man Just Happen? p. 68).
Endless Varieties of Life on Earth
More than a million different animal species have already been described, classified and named - "and it is probable that many thousands more are still to be discovered." In the world of insects alone there are at least a million different kinds, * not all of which have been described and classified.
* Insects are as remarkable for their variety as for their numbers. There are tiny wasps less than one-onehundredth of an inch long. There are thin insects, fat insects, meek insects, fierce insects, flat insects, cylindrical insects, insects that seldom move and others as fleet as the wind. WHICH CAME FROM WHICH - or, did the Creator design and make them all?
The beetles alone include some 250,000 species! Butterflies and moths total over 110,000 species! Bees, wasps and ants number over 10,000 species! Here are the questions that arise; Since evolution demands such long periods of time for the development of species, by the slow processes of "fortuitous changes" and "natural mutations," how can it possibly account for such a vast number of species, and why did such an incredible number of species evolve in the same environment? Why, if evolution did it, did not all beetles evolve into a few primary varieties? If it took millions of years to develop one type of beetle, how long did it take to evolve 250,000 species? Then think of the other thousands of species of life on earth. And remember, the 250,000 species of beetles are distinct species, each an interbreeding population, and NOT just "varieties." Since science has set the age of our earth at from four to five billion years, ALL EVOLUTION MUST HAVE TAKEN PLACE IN THE LAST TWO TO THREE BILLION YEARS AT THE MOST. So the whole theory collapses in view of the vast variety of life on earth, and the tremendous time needed by evolutionists to account for even minor changes.
Wherever one looks in nature, he is confronted by innumerable varieties of life - especially in the lower echelons.
There are over 100,000 known species of fungi; 5,000 species of green algae; 3,000 species of sponges; 5,000 species of corals and their kin; 25,000 species of crustacea (barnacles, crabs, lobsters, shrimp, etc,); 80,000 species of mollusks or shellfish; and there are over 300,000 species of plant life!
Many of these multiplied forms of life exist in great profusion.
"Two hundred million insects may inhabit a single acre of pasture" - and the same acre will harbor trillions upon trillions of bacteria.
Many insects multiply with unbelievable rapidity. Consider the aphids.
"If all the progeny of a pair of aphids survived for ONE SEASON they would number 1,560,000,000,000,000,000,000,000." Thanks to the Creator's marvelous provisions of maintaining "balance in nature" their natural enemies do not permit a run-away development of aphids, fleas, or any other prolific insect.
Most amazing of all - EACH OF THESE MYRIADS OF SPECIES IN NATURE HAS ITS OWN DISTINCTIVE CHARACTERISTICS. For instance:
"Each of the giant silkworm moths of North America makes its own distinctive cocoon, and many of them have a distinctive leaf for food. the cocoons of the Luna and Lo moths are merely spun in a leaf, with which they fall to the ground. On the other hand, those of the Promethea moth (which feeds on spicebush, sassafras and other trees), are spun in a leaf which is securely bound to its twig."
Variety Among Beetles
Nowhere in nature can one see such vast variety as exists in the 25,000 species of beetles. Some beetles are as small as a pinhead, and others, like the elephant beetles (the Goliath and the Titan) are a full six inches in length! Some, like the weevils, destroy our foods and crops, and others eat vast quantities of destructive insects.
The so-called "death-watch beetle" (Anobium) will bang his horny head upon the wood where he has made his home, making a noise to attract his lady-love. Because of this strange ticking sound, the superstitious call it the "death-watch beetle."
We already have spoken of the bombardier beetle that, when apprehensive of attack, "will audibly eject with explosive force a fluid which volatizes, upon emission, into smoke." *
* The Guiana termites have an equally strange ability. Members of a "soldier caste" among them have a sort of squirt gun on their heads, through which they squirt a sticky liquid over raiding ants that have invaded their colonies. How long would it take "evolution" to develop that "squirt gun"? Who gave them the chemical formula for this "sticky liquid" so well suited to their defense needs?
Blind evolution is helpless to produce such endless intricacies of design and adaptation. Why - how - could chance evolution, by "random changes," produce an intricate, living, workable mechanism like a bombardier beetle - then suddenly and radically change the pattern and produce, let us say, a "water beetle" (adapted to aquatic life,) and then repeat this process 250,000 times!
Other distinctive beetles are the "violin" beetle (so named because of its peculiar shape), the "dung" beetle that rolls up dung into a ball several times bigger than itself, "water" beetles, the so-called "drug-room" beetle - so named because "it waxes fat on chemicals strong enough to poison an army." Another strange beetle (the Sitodrepa panicla) thrives on cigars.
And now, more questions for evolutionists to answer: How many generations or ages did it take unguided evolution gradually to make the change in eating habits from cotton or corn to tobacco and poisonous chemicals? And why do these beetles persistently refuse, generation after generation, to change their eating habits, whether their diet is cotton, corn, cigars or poisonous chemicals? The truly logical and satisfying answer is, GOD MADE THEM SO IN THE BEGINNING.
Why is it that the larvae of the "stag beetle" passes years in timber oak trees before it attains its adult form? whereas the larvae of the so-called "oil beetles" have the "incomparable instinct" of gaining a living in bee hives! And note well the complicated procedure these larvae go through to get their daily rations:
"When hatched they climb without difficulty the stems of flowers where they calmly await the arrival of a bee. As soon as a bee comes along the oil beetle larva takes a firm hold of the bee's hair and rides along to the hive where if first diets on the eggs of the queen bee, and later (it undergoes two distinct stages of development) it subsists on the honey of the hive." This phenomenon is so utterly unaccountable that evolution is at a complete loss to explain this mystery.
There is Great Variety Everywhere
Whenever one looks in nature there is great and pleasing variety. The cheerful songs of birds are as varied as their colored plumages and their nests. The intriguing subjects of sound and color in nature disclose variety without end.
We have the chirp of the cricket, the babbling of the brook, the swish of the wind, the crackling of the fire, the melody of the songbird, the bark of the dog, the mooing of cows, the neighing of horses, the bleating of sheep, the gentle purring of the cat, the roar of the lion, and a thousand and one other sounds we are all familiar with and that help make life pleasant, interesting and adventurous.
In the realm of color we have the same phenomenon: endless, pleasing variety. Who has not been charmed by the subtle colors of the rainbow, the ever-changing color schemes of the sky at the time of the setting of the sun? What is more fascinating than the gorgeous display of colors in a flower garden or the richly colored plumage to be seen in the aviary?
Who gave the sea shells their delicate colorings and symmetrical and attractively colored? Who created the "Glory of the Sea," an exquisite sea shell from the West Indies? The Fingers of Omnipotence can also be seen in the pinkish shells of the "Angel's Wings" bivalves, that live about a foot below the surface of the mud. Why such ornate beauty covered by mud - unless the Great Designer loves the beautiful and made this shell so that man too might enjoy its loveliness with Him? Who first put on the drawing board the intricate designs of such shells as the limpet, whelk, moon shell, the fascinating helix, and the charming periwinkle? Who tinted the "Queen conch" with delicate pastel shades of pinks and yellows and light browns? It would take volumes even to begin adequately to describe all the marvelous, symmetrical and beautiful sea shells that are subjects of study and admiration to students of conchology. But Whoever made them left evidence in His handiwork that He is an Engineer par excellence and an Artist without a peer!
Why is it that all things in nature are not a dull slate color, or a listless gray? Such infinite variety and pleasantness as exists in the color schemes of the world - in sky, earth and seas - witness to the fact of purposeful design, by One who loves the beautiful, and shows His desire that mankind too enjoy the lovely and the beutiful things He has made.
Let us now discuss the fact of
The "Fixity" and "Constancy" of each Genus
If ever the evolutionist had an opportunity to demonstrate his theories, it would be in the realm of some lower forms of life, such as bacteria or aphids, or flies, that multiply so rapidly and with but brief periods of time from one generation to the next. And yet, THERE NEVER HAS BEEN ANY DEMONSTRABLE CHANGE OF ANY GENUS INTO ANOTHER, NO MATTER HOW BRIEF THE TIME FROM ONE GENERATION TO ANOTHER, IN ANY OF THE INNUMERABLE GENERA ON EARTH. *
* Some bacteria and protozoa, under favorable conditions, can mature and reproduce a new generation in 30 minutes or less. Thus over 17,500 generations could appear in one year! Yet we have proof that many kinds of these minute creatures have persisted without perceptible change for many thousands of years. Ancient Greeks and Egyptians suffered from the same bacterial diseases we do. Moreover, paleontologists have found numerous examples of diseased conditions among fossils of ancient rocks, proving that certain pathological conditions of the bones, caused by the same disease producing microbes that are active today, have persisted without perceptible change for countless generations.
On the other hand, each genus demonstrates a most stubborn "fixity" and absolute refusal to change, even through long ages. And this well-known fact can be proven abundantly from the writings of evolutionists themselves! Consider well the force of the facts presented in these quotations.
"Mollusks are one of the oldest and largest groups of animals. For over a half a billion years species of mollusks have been common in the seas."
"Some of the oldest known fossils are corals that lived about 500,000,000 years ago."
"At the base of the family tree of animal life are single-celled animals (Protozoa) WHICH STILL LIVE in warm shallow seas as they did many millions of years ago." (Caps ours).
"As long as 200 million years ago, roaches and other insects were common. . . .Most of the 12,000 kinds of fossil insects identified are similar to living species." (This reminds us of the statement by Huxley, "The only difference between the fossil and the animal of today is that one is older than the other.")
"Gastropoda (shellfish, limpets, winkles, whelks, etc.), are very old inhabitants of the sea and have lived there without undergoing much change for from three to four hundred million years." (The Living Sea, p. 202).
"One hundred twenty million years ago, oysters lay in quantities in the shallow seas." (Ibid) p. 211).
"Chitons (amphineurans) first appeared nearly 500 million years ago, yet they have remained unchanged to this very day." (National Audubon Society Nature Program).
"Scorpions can boast of the longest family line of any land animals. They have changed hardly at all during a span of 400,000,000 years" (W. J. Gertsch).
As far as the earliest geological records of the existence of algae (sea weeds) allow us to see, THEY HAVE NOT CHANGED MUCH IN EITHER FORM OR LIFE ACTIVITIES; some species of today may well be identical with ancestors that lived in the Archeozoic sea about 1.2 billion years ago." (Francis Joseph Weiss, in "The Useful Algae," Scientific American, 12-'52).
"Sharks appeared on earth 300,000,000 to 350,000,000 years ago" (T. H. Eaton, Junior).
"In the rocks of the earliest period for which we have good fossils (The Cambrian Period), all of the important invertebrate phyla are already represented. So that . . . the fossil records have nothing to say about the order in which the phyla arose" ("Animals Without Backbones"). (What a confession, coming from an evolutionist).
"Turtles . . . have come down almost unchanged in form and habits since the great Age of Reptiles, more than 160,000,000 years ago." (Book of Popular Science, p. 2075).
"Modern species of Lingula (one genus of Brachiopods) are almost identical with species which we estimate, from the fossil record, to have lived almost 500,00,000 years ago. This is a record for conservatism among animals, and Lingula has the 'honor' of being the oldest-known animal genus." (Animals Without Backbones, p. 178).
"The Ginkgo, or maiden-hair tree, flourished during the Jurassic period, and was the first broad-leaved tree. It still exists today in China and Japan, having undergone no change for more than a hundred million years" (Book of Knowledge, Vol. 5, p. 1545).
Speaking of the "King Crab" )Genus Limulus), one authority says, "These animals are often referred to as 'living fossils' because they have changed so little from the earliest fossil representatives of the group." (Animals Without Backbones, p. 271).
Grasshoppers in Glaciers and Ants in Amber
Two most remarkable witnesses for the "persistence of Species" are GRASSHOPPERS IN GLACIERS AND ANTS IN AMBER.
There is a so-called "Grasshopper Glacier" of the "Pleistocene age" (one to two million years ago), in Montana. In the Glacial Period, these grasshoppers fell by the millions into a lake; they froze there and the lake became part of the glacier. "One can see those grasshoppers in the glacier today, and they are the same kind of grasshoppers we have now." (Did Man Just Happen, p. 74).
Many scientists have written on "Insects in Amber." (See "Insects in Amber," by Charles T. Brues, Scientific American; "Evolution of Insects," by Carpenter, in the 1953 Annual Report of The Smithsonian Institution; The Living Sea (chapter on Time Periods and Fossils). Here is the unbiased witness of Chas. T. Brues:
"There is a deposit vault where we can find ancient insects, more beautifully preserved than any fossil ever disinterred from the rocks. This reservoir is amber: an ancient tree-sap which trapped insects like fly-paper and then hardened to preserve the insect intact for millions of years. *
* It is difficult to date fossils. No one knows how old they are. But the ancient dates scientists quote become a most powerful argument for they themselves admit that they believe many species HAVE NOT CHANGED MATERIALLY FOR HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS!
It is now possible to compare the insect life of 70 million years ago with that of today. . . Among the earliest insects were some hardy types, such as the cockroaches, THAT STILL EXIST IN MUCH THE SAME FORM. . . .Some 70 million years ago (insects) WERE PRESENT IN NUMBERS AND VARIETY COMPARABLE TO THE PICTURE THEY PRESENT TODAY. The insects of that period, as preserved in the Baltic amber, were very similar to those that now inhabit the temperate regions of Europe and North America" (Insects in Amber).
". . . .More remarkable still is the occurrence in the amber (Baltic amber) of certain species of insects, mostly ants, which are apparently identical with some species now living. The Baltic amber has also furnished proof of the existence of social habits among the insects of that time, for the ants that occur there include, in addition to males and females, major and minor workers. The extent to which the complex habits of living ants had already been acquired in the early Tertiary is shown by the presence of plant lice attended by ants in search for honey dew, and by the presence of mites attached to the ants in the same manner as is characteristic today." (Annual Report, 1953, Smithsonian Institution).
And so there is proof that through the ages ants have not changed either their form or their social habits - not even their custom, still practised today by many ants, of using aphids as "cows" as a source of honey dew for their own use! There is overwhelming proof, from scores, even hundreds, of scientists, that GENERA ARE STATIC - they tend, for ages on end, to reproduce "after their kind," showing no change in either form or habits for periods of time running into the millions of years - even hundreds of millions of years, according to evolutionists.
We feel constrained to quote the words of our friend, Prof. Leroy Victor Cleveland.
"Not a bacterium, nor alga, nor salp worm, nor anything else ever evolved higher. Check the facts and see. The Rhodesian alga are supposedly 'three billion years old.' WHEN, pray tell, are they going to evolve higher? Or when will ameba, stentor, volvox, ascidian larva, ant, moss, gnat, clam or bedbug 'evolve higher'?"
Another Question for Evolutionists to Answer
Now, we believe, is the time for us to ask this question:
"How could it occur that one individual, or a few individuals, of a given genus, or population, should advance toward a higher type, WHILE ALL THE REST OF THE SAID SPECIES SHOULD REMAIN in status quo?" For example: Amebas we have still with us today, and they still multiply true to form. Yet the amebas are supposed by some evolutionists to be one of the earliest forms of animal life. IF ONE AMEBA "EVOLVED" WHY DIDN'T ALL OF THEM EVOLVE? HOW IS IT THAT THERE ARE ANY AMEBAS ON EARTH TODAY, IF THEIR TENDENCY IS TO EVOLVE TO HIGHER FORMS?
------------------------------------
THE MANY STRANGE AND ODD SPECIMENS OF LIFE ARE WITNESSES TO THE FACT OF SPECIAL, DIVINE CREATION.
One of the strangest creatures God ever made is the Australian Platypus. We believe He purposely made it to confuse and confound the evolutionists. It is a squat, heavy-bodied animal about eighteen inches long. It weighs three to four pounds. It has a deep rich brown velvety fur (gray or white underneath) like the fur of a seal or a mole. It has a flat bill, like a duck, with no teeth after it reaches maturity. It has five toes on each foot, which is webbed - a cross between the feet of a duck and an animal adapted to scratch and dig. It is one of the only two mammals in the world that lays eggs. * Unlike other hatched animals, their young nurse. But instead of nursing from "conventional" nipples or breasts, the young simply lick the mother's belly fur, and the milk follows the hair ends.
* The other mammals that lay eggs are the Echidnas, toothless, spiny anteaters, also of Australia. Echidnas do not in other respects resemble the Platypus. Instead of having a covering of fur, they are covered with sharp, hard spines. Their snouts are long and slender. They live on ants and termites.
The male platypus has a hollow spur on the inside of its heel, which connects with a gland as poisonous as most poisonous snakes. So it is the world's ONLY venomous furred creature.
Unlike most mammals, its limbs are short and parallel to the ground - like the limbs of a lizard. Its eyes are small, while its external ear is only a hole, and not the customary ear-lobe such as mammals usually have. In habits it is nocturnal.
To help hold its food, which it catches under water (worms, snails, larvae, insects, etc.), it has large cheek pouches like those of a monkey or a squirrel.
It lives in burrows, which start from a point below water level, in rivers or ponds. The Platypus can dig well despite the fact that the web on its front feet extends out beyond the claws. The web folds back, like a small umbrella, into the palm, leaving the sharp claws exposed, ready for aggressive digging. The unique foot of the platypus is "an amazing contraption" and gives clear evidence of design and adaptation for an intended purpose - to dig and to swim.
What did the platypus evolve from? Let us imagine an Evolutionists' Round Table Discussion of this problem.
"He must have got his bill from the duck," suggested one. "That is obvious."
"Think so?" asked the second. "But a duck has feathers, not fur. It seems to me his fur indicates direct descent from some animal like the beaver - but then a beaver doesn't lay eggs."
"Wait a minute," interposed a third. "He's toothless and has spurs: that could suggest an ancestry from the chicken - and remember a chicken lays eggs, too." He caught his breath, thought for a moment, then changed his course. "But then, a chicken doesn't have fur either. That pesky fur eliminates descent from either a duck or a chicken. Quite confusing," he mumbled. But he started in again. "The female lays eggs, but she isn't a bird. Then too, those poison spurs present a problem - no other furred animal is venemous."
"Yes, and she suckles her young, but has no breasts," interrupted the first speaker. "Whales suckle their young - but then they don't lay eggs. Confound this problem, anyhow! Everywhere we turn we meet a roadblock. Let's try another line. The male has poison-dealing spurs, something like a snake, but they are spurs and not fangs. And everyone knows it couldn't come from a snake anyhow, for a snake doesn't have webbed feet."
Speaker number two had been engaged in deep thought. He was now ready to theorize again. "How in the name of common sense did it get its nipples - I mean its milk hairs, or what do I mean." He was clearly confused. Presently he reassembled his wits and continued. "And from what did its webbed, clawed feet develop - from ducks or muskrats? We have already eliminated ducks, and I guess we'll have to throw out muskrats, because they don't lay eggs." He started to scratch his head.
It may have been that unconscious gesture that caused another cogitating disciple of Darwin to suggest that "there might possibly be some distant relationship between the platypus and the monkey - for both have pockets in their jaws to carry food in." But on second thought he opined that "that isn't possible because the monkey is higher up the ladder of evolution than the platypus."
"Then where will we place this evasive critter" asked one of the Discussion Group who up to this time had felt that silence was the better part of rushing in where angels fear to tread. Being a neo-Darwinian, he had mentally recoiled from their naive and hasty suppositions. "We'll have to look into this matter from the viewpoint of heredity and genes," he reminded them, with an evident air of superior knowledge.
"But his genes must be as mixed up as he is," countered the first theorists. How could sensible genes and chromosomes come up with a conglomeration like this thing? He isn't a duck, or other bird, or a beaver, or a snake, or a monkey, or a lizard, much less a whale - but he seems to have been assembled from parts of all of them!"
At this point a "theist evolutionist," who usually keeps his opinions to himself, suggested somewhat shyly, "Well, maybe this is where God stepped in and helped evolution along."
At this the rest of the group chuckled and the first speaker said in a superior tone - "certainly you don't believe that an all-powerful and an all-wise God is going to waste time guiding evolution! If a 'Supreme Being' had any thing to do with it, it is much easier to believe in 'special creation' than what you suggest."
The second speaker chimed in: "I agree; it seems to me that if a 'Supreme Being' had anything to do with it He wouldn't follow such a devious route that requires such a waste of time; but my main objection is that no one yet has told us WHAT the platypus came from - or how it got along before its organs were fully evolved."
"I'll tell you what" said the neo-Darwinian, with a twinkle in his eye, "He probably was dropped down from Mars!"
They all laughed and were about to give up the discussion, when an even tempered professor, who had been listening up to this point, said: "Don't give up; remember evolution does its work slowly - through millions of years. Just give us more time, perhaps a few millions years more - and we'll come up with the right answer. After all, the platypus is HERE, and it HAD to evolve from something" - and then he suddenly recalled the animated discussion they had had - or shall I say, 'from some things,' didn't it?" More laughter, and then they quit the discussion, this time for good.
Clearly, the conglomerate platypus defies all explanation, from the viewpoint of the theory of evolution. It is one of God's road-blocks, warning the theorists of the blind alley ahead that they persist in going down. It is therefore a living Witness for God and Creation, shouting to all who will listen to facts and common sense:
"GOD designed my perfectly adapted feet for the niche in life He created me to fill; my webs are to swim with and my claws are to dig with, and they work, even if it is a novel arrangement. GOD gave me my bill so I could secure my food from the mud from under the water; and GOD put those pockets in my jaws so I could hold more food at each diving, and then come to the surface and enjoy my meal at leisure. GOD gave me my fur to keep me warm after my repeated immersions. GOD put claws and poison fangs on me so I could protect myself against my natural enemies. GOD gave me the knowledge to build my well-designed home underground, with an underwater entrance that helps keep my family from many dangers. And I rather suspect that God made me as He did, equipping me with 'impossible' combinations, in a most unusual departure from normal routine, to confuse and confound those who ignore HIM, I tell you GOD MADE ME AS I AM - and I want the world to know it!"
Plant Oddities
Every plant in the world is a miracle and a mystery, with a thousand and one functions, characteristics and abilities that defy all explanation: all life is like that. Life itself is that most mysterious thing on this planet for it is the gift of GOD, the infinite Author of life. Some forms of life deviate so from conventional types that they seem to defy the very laws of life.
Some bacteria can live in hot springs at a temperature of 1750 F., while spores of other bacteria have survived after being exposed to the temperature of liquid air (-3100 ). Some flowers push their way up through snow and ice, while others lie dormant in desert sands for years, then carpet the desert valleys after a rain that may come but once in several years.
Many deadly poisons (some of which are useful drugs) are extracted from delicate plants with beautiful flowers, such as aconite from monkshood. Strychnine, opium, cocaine, digitalis and belladonna are but a few of the many others.
Some plants die as soon as they have flowered, * while some trees (the Joshua trees and the giant sequoias) live up to 3,000 years and more.
* There is a bamboo plant in the mountains of Jamaica, that takes 32 years to mature. It then flowers ONCE - and dies. No one knows why.
The great water lily of the Amazon and Indonesia has leaf blades five feet in diameter, while some palms have leaves twenty feet long. There are seaweeds that grow in the dim light of the ocean 450 feet below the surface. This is quite an achievement, for the light is so dim at that great depth, that the normal process of photosynthesis is greatly retarded.
There are several kinds of "epiphytes," or "air plants," that get their nourishment from the air rather than from the soil. The staghorn fern is an example.
"It grows on other trees, with its leaves pressed against the trunk of the tree. The leaves cover large masses of roots that get their nourishment direct from the air."
One could try vainly for a thousand generations to "educate" the roots of plants or trees adapted to get their food from the soil, to get their sustenance from the air only - and not succeed. How is it then that SOME plants, the "epiphytes," HAVE mastered the secret? The answer is, God in the beginning made them so.
Who designed the 500 kinds of so-called "killer plants" that trap, kill and eats insects? We already have mentioned some of these, such as the famous "pitcher plant."
What could be more ingenious, complicated, designed for a purpose, and with apparent "intelligence," than the machinations of the sundew?
The sundew plant has about 200 tiny red filaments on the upper surface of each leaf. Each filament is club-shaped at its free end and carries a refractile goblet of fluid, that is a sticky substance from which it is impossible for an insect to free itself.
Movement of wind, rain or dust, or falling bits of mud, sand or leaves, or even small bits of sugar, placed on them by human hands, on the leaves of the sundew, cause the leaves and the filaments to re-act. The filaments will secrete an acid fluid, but there is no attempt whatever at "capturing" the non-living object, nor is there any attempt to digest it. "BUT LET A SMALL INSECT LIGHT ON A SUNDEW LEAF, AND - wonderful to relate - THE CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF THE SECRETION OF THE FILAMENTS IS AT ONCE CHANGED INTO A DIGESTIVE FERMENT, and the process of appropriating the unfortunate insect as food begins." Where did a lowly plant get such "intelligence?"
The bladderwort, that grows in water, is equally amazing. It is equipped with traps that look like small bladders floating in the water. These traps are cleverly designed to catch small aquatic animal life.
An opening exists at one side of the bladder. Around this opening is a set of radiating hairs set diagonally outward. These serve to guide the unsuspecting victim into the mouth of the trap. The opening is provided with a hinged, transparent door which opens inward but not outward. Once a creature has entered this door, his doom is sealed, for the door closes and he cannot get out. He becomes food for his captor - a PLANT showing more intelligence than an animal! Or, is it that the Creator has made the plant function in such a way as to seem to have intelligence? In any event the whole scheme shows design that could only have been achieved by a Designer.
Nature Teaches Man Many Moral Lessons
Did the Creator make the bladderwort only so that it could ensnare and kill and eat small animals? Or, is there a moral lesson in it for mankind? In a world judged by reason of the Fall of Man, there is much "evil" in nature - the reflection of the evil in mankind. We personally, however, have no doubt that God deliberately created many animals and plants for the express purpose of teaching mankind some important lessons. Both the spider's web and the bladderwort's trap are graphic illustrations of temptation and the resulting ruin. The fox is the age-long illustration of cunning and rapaciousness. The lamb is the picture of non-resistance to evil. The lion speaks to us of powerful leadership. The poisonous snake reminds us of deadly cunning. As a matter of fact, there is an important lesson inherent in practically every creature God ever made. The Son of God while on earth spoke often of lessons from nature, as the branch "abiding" in the vine, the adornment God gave to the lilies of the field, the shortness of life of the grass of the field, etc. Then, too, He was spoken of as the "Lamb of God" that takes away the sin of the world.
More About Peculiar Insects
We already have called attention to a few of the many strange "beetles." Let us list some other strange facts about insects.
Though the great majority of insects come from eggs, through a larval stage, the aphid, a tiny plant louse, sometimes gives birth to live young!
In Java there are strange earthworms that sing - and even whistle!
Consider the "misplaced" ears of the grasshopper.
"The ears of the grasshopper are either at the base of her abdomen or in her forearms, according to her species. . . .What surprises me is that Nature. . . .has had the imagination to put ears anywhere else than on the side of the head" (The Hunting Wasp, p. 53).
What quirk of Evolution could move ears from the side of the head to the base of the abdomen, or to the forearms? And how many million years did it take to make such a change? How did the grasshopper hear while its ears were being moved? For the sovereign all-powerful God to change the style occasionally creates no special problem - but for unguided "evolution" to be given the credit for such a radical change creates an unanswerable problem.
Who instructed the Difflugia, a free-living relative of ameba, to gather sand grains, cement them together with a sticky secretion and build them into a kind of house having a definite design (it looks like a ball) which it carries about with itself and into which it withdraws when disturbed? (See "Animals Without Backbones;" chapter on "A Variety of Protozoa," p. 49). And who imparted to this small protozoan the secret formula for this cement?
A female water bug, "not trusting her husband's voracious appetite," cements her eggs directly to his back, where he cannot reach them! How long would it take this lowly water bug to think up this scheme, and put it onto practice by training her husband to co-operate and stand still while she did the cementing? And how much longer would it take her to design and install in her tiny body a chemical plant capable of manufacturing the proper kind of cement to make the eggs stick there? If the female water bug had to rely on the uncertainty of "random changes" to produce such a wise scheme as she has to protect her young, she would NEVER attain her end; as a matter of fact, she would NEVER have the foresight to think up or desire such a scheme in the first place.
The Strange Cicadas
These peculiar insects, the cicadas, are sometimes called "Seventeen-year locusts," though the 75 species of cicadas differ widely in the time they take to mature. Their life cycle is very strange - and utterly unaccountable, aside from the miracle of Divine creation.
The females cut slits in young twigs and deposit eggs in them. As the wingless, scaly young hatch, they drop to the ground, burrow in, AND STAY THERE FOUR TO TWENTY YEARS, according to their species - and no one can ever guess why. Those that stay in the ground four years breed a new generation that also stays in the ground four years; and those that stay in 17 years breed a new generation that stays in the ground 17 years!
As nymphs underground, they live on juices sucked from roots. When its predetermined time cycle elapses, the full-grown nymph emerges and climbs a tree trunk. Its skin splits down the back, and the adult emerges. These adults live about a week - long enough to mate and start another brood.
Why do they stay underground for several years? Who designed them and gave them the necessary adaptations for such a long underground existence? If they enjoy underground living so well, why do they ever come out - why not just live and die underground? Evolution has no answer.
The Extremely Odd "Praying Mantis" *
* Also called "Preying mantids."
The so-called praying mantis is an "insect nightmare" if ever there was one. It is commonly about 2 inches long. Its spiny, ferocious forelegs, its protruding eyes that pop out from its head that appears to be a caricature of a snake's head, its long body and ambling gait, and its bony "armor" suggest "a prehistoric reptile in miniature." It has no voice, and lacks real ears. Its closest "relative" in nature is the grasshopper - but it is so unlike the grasshopper, there is a "gulf" between them impossible to bridge by any evolutionary theory. It is a cannibal; and in the natural state its prey must be "alive and moving." In the fall the female lays hundreds of eggs in a frothy mass that dries like hardened brown foam. "After mating, the female dispatches her mate with a well placed bite and devours him at her leisure." (National Geographic Magazine article on "Praying Mantis").
Neither in appearance nor in habits (characteristics) can the Praying Mantis be explained by evolutionary theories. The variations in the over 1000 species (15 of which may be found in the United States) may be accounted for on the basis of "gene mutations," but WHERE DID THE ODD CREATURES COME FROM TO START WITH? Who gave the mantis the uncanny ability "to thrust forth her spiny forelegs" with lightning speed and grab her victim (a fly or other insect) as in "a toothed steel trap?" From what ancestor did the female learn the revolting art of beheading her husband, who is smaller and of slighter build? The mantis, in looks and in habits, is like a lone island in the midst of a vast ocean of creation, with NO CLOSE CONNECTION WITH OTHER INSECTS.
--------------------------------------------------------
STRANGE FISH AND OTHER ODD INHABITANTS OF THE SEAS:
WITNESSES TO THE FACT OF DIVINE CREATION
It has been said that "the body of the tuna fish represents one of the most perfect streamlined contours known to Nature." But then, other fish also draw forth enthusiastic comments about their perfect streamlining:
"An adult swordfish may measure 15 feet from tip of sword to end of tail. It is shaped on the lines of a mackerel and is the epitome of streamlining. The pointed head. . . the sharp, backward rake of the dorsal fin, the long, lithe, powerful body, sloping gradually to the great crescent-shaped, tail, fit it for the most rapid and forceful movement through the water."
Its sword - "stronger than steel" - is so sturdy and sharply pointed that, "when driven with terrific speed, it can penetrate the oaken planks of ocean-going vessels."
The air bladder of the bony fish is obviously designed for an intended purpose.
"Most of the bony fishes posses air bladders, containing oxygen - sometimes undiluted - to enable the fish to float at certain depths. By regulating the gas pressure the fish can readily move about on a horizontal plane at any reasonable depth." (The Living Sea").
As a fish rises toward the surface, the pressure of the surrounding water decreases, and consequently the gas in the bladder expands and the body of the fish tends to rise too rapidly. But then gas is absorbed by the appropriate parts of the bladder wall, so that equilibrium is restored. When the fish descends, the system works in reverse - and it is all automatic.
There are features about the anatomy of the fish not yet fully understood by modern science. For example:
"In a cavity on each side of the fish's skull are two chambers, each containing a small stone. These are the ear stones, or 'otoliths,' and these chambers and stones constitute the ears of the bony fish. These ears are very different from the ears of land dwellers, and quite how they operate is not known," (The Living Sea, p. 141).
To believe that an intricate and working mechanism for hearing and balance, designed for use under water, should have just "happened" or came about by "chance mutations" is absurd.
Whales and some fish do not have the "air bladders" that the bony fishes have; and how they (the whales) endure the tremendous pressure changes involved in dives of several hundreds of fathoms is a mystery.
Every type of marine life is especially "adapted" to its own environment and to the place in the scheme of things that the Creator assigned to it. It is not necessary to illustrate this fact by many cases, but let us give one.
The weevers, arrow-like fishes with thatched flanks as though streaked with rain beaten down at an angle by the wind, are Trachinidae (from the Greek trachus, or stinging) and they spend most of the time more or less buried in sand. This way of life determines their three fundamental characteristics (or, do the 'characteristics' the Creator endowed them with determine their habitat and manner of living? We believe the latter). All of these characteristics are excellently "adapted" to their life: eyes directed upwards to spot their prey from their hiding place in the sand: a mouth with a vertical gape made to snap at any prey coming within reach; and dorsal fins with long and venomous spines to protect them against their enemies. ( The Underwater Naturalist, p. 209).
Instead of trying to delude ourselves into believing that these fish (weevers) lived in the sand, at first totally unprepared for such an existence, and that these special "adaptations" developed through the ages, it is much more reasonable to believe that the Great Designer made the weevers to suit the habitat He put them in. A fish does not plan ahead.
If a fish tried to live in an environment and was totally unprepared for its hazards, it (the species) would soon become extinct, and never arrive at a state of adaptation. This fact is one of the principle arguments against the fallacy of evolution. Adaptation, to be workable, must be perfect; an imperfect or partial adaptation is unworkable and ruinous. ALL life throughout the entire realm of nature is perfectly adapted to its environment and gives indisputable evidence of being designed and hence created for its place in the world of nature. Moreover, each genus is static, persistently so, and gives no evidence whatever of change from its "kind" except in minor "variations" within the confines of the genus. The happy state of "workability" and "dependability" that exists in nature could not exist if evolution were true.
Great Variety of Life in the Plankton.
Consider now the "miracle" of the profuse and fascinating variety of life in the plankton. The drifting animal and plant life of the oceans near the surface, that is food for ocean fish and marine animals, is called "plankton" * (from a Greek word meaning wandering). One authority says,
"Any one may find in the surface waters of the sea, animals (mostly microscopic) that hold their own with those in Fairy Tales." (The Strange World of Nature, p.19). Some of these strange creatures "are wholly unlike any known animals from land or even fresh water" ("Strange Babies of the Sea," by Hilary B. Moore, in the July, 1952 "National Geographic").
Included among these strange creatures are weird specimens as the transparent Salp; arrowworms (named from their shape); the trumpet-like Stentor: the unbelievable Siphonophores that lay eggs in one generation and develop plant-like buds in the next; and tiny creatures with near ghostlike and nightmarish shapes, as the thin, transparent, baby lobster, needle-nosed babies of Porcelain Crabs and a thousand and one other oddities that defy description.
* Plants and animals that live in the water are divided into three main groups: the plankton, the nekton and the benthos. Plankton is the name for those forms of life that float at or near the surface. They include a great variety of tiny animal and plants as well as larval forms of many other animals. The Nekton, made up of creatures that swim actively, include most fish and also squids, whales, porpoises, and shrimp of many kinds. the Benthos includes those countless animals that creep on the sand and bury themselves in the mud, hide in crevices or fasten themselves to the rocks.
Myriads of Marvels of the Deep
A visit to an "undersea garden" as seen through the bottom of a glass-bottomed boat "is like a scene from fairyland, with strange-patterned fish darting about sea flowers of every description." (H. J. Shepstone).
"The coloring of the corals, sea flowers and other varied marine life is almost beyond description. The coral polyps themselves are of every conceivable color - brown, violet, pink, white, yellow, purple, bright blue and vivid scarlet. The anemones, sea cucumbers and sea urchins are also of many varied tints. There are sponges of black and purple, covered with a thin sheen of emerald green. And darting hither and thither are troops of fishes having color patterns which are exquisitely beautiful - tube worms with brilliantly-colored crowns of tentacles, and innumerable starfish, crabs, and crustaceans, many of them also highly colored. Truly, a reef of living coral with its gorgeously-colored inhabitants is a sea garden, more interesting than any garden of flowering plants."
Let us present some more of these
"Strange Sea Creatures"
(1) The Unique Sea Horse
"Mother nature outdid herself when she assembled the sea horse. This bizarre creature has the arching neck and head of a stallion, the swelling bosom of a pouter pigeon, the grasping tail of a monkey and the color-changing power of a chameleon. It has eyes that pivot independently, so that when one eye scans the surface, the other can be directed underwater. To top this fantastic make-up the male is equipped with a kangaroo-style pouch from which the little ones are born."
This four-inch long sea horse is the only fish that swims upright! He has a special "gas bladder" that enables him to keep his upright position. If this bladder is damaged and he loses even a tiny bit of the gas, he sinks to the bottom, there to lie helpless until death overtakes him or his bladder heals.
But the most amazing feature of all is that it is the male sea-horse that "goes into labor and gives birth to its young. This strange division of the sea-horse's reproductive functions, is the peak of this tiny fish's paradoxical make-up."
"The female sea-horse provides the eggs. During courtship, the female actively pursues the male, deposits her eggs in a pouch on her mate's belly, and then swims away. In the pouch the eggs are nourished on the father's blood for 45 days. . . .after a series of parental convulsions (with apparently every muscle brought into play) the pouch is emptied and the baby sea-horses (from 300 to 600) are born!"
Evolution is utterly at a loss to account for such unorthodox procedures, and such strange creatures. The "Sea-horse" is in a similar category with the platypus, as far as evolution is concerned: it presents an enigma that baffles and frustrates all theories that seek to account for it! Admit the Divine Designer, and all is accounted for.
(2) The Improbable Sting Ray
For perfection of movement, look at the ray.
"Among the movements of all living things in the sea the most perfectly harmonious is undoubtedly the swimming of the ray. When this bird of the depths' beats its wings, the fleshy wings themselves undulate. A sinuous movement takes place from back to front, being most supple at the edges, creating a movement as of frills and scallops reminiscent of the waving of a silk handkerchief, or an Egyptian dancer. . . . This improbable-looking bat-like creature, looks like a monster from another world, a demoniacal phantom in violet or dark grey, but with a pure white patch on its belly, flying silently and mysteriously through the water. . . . But when the ray comes to rest it appears to be an almost deformed-looking beast, flopped down." (The Underwater Naturalist, pp. 228, 236).
What Architect designed the supple movements and the perfect rhythm of this dread beast of the sea? The co-ordination of muscles and the rhythmic movement through the water could never be achieved by the trial and error method; the grace and suppleness and perfect rhythm of the ray demand an Architect of supernatural ability, a Worker with infinite perfections.
(3) The Humble Oyster: the Brainless Wonder
In the November, 1953, "Scientific American" is an intriguing article by Pieter Korringa, on "OYSTERS." We quote:
"The existence of the oyster is so different from a vertebrate's experience that even with the most unprejudiced study we find it hard to understand. Although thousands of investigations have been made of the bivalve, its life is still mysterious. The creature defies many elementary rules of animal biology. . . . Even anatomically we cannot make head or tail of the oyster, for it possesses neither of these organs. Yet in spite of its lack of a brain and its seemingly poor equipment for survival the oyster deserves our boundless admiration. It has senses (chemical and tactile) which are extremely acute, a feeding system which is extraordinarily delicate and effective, a metabolism which ministers to its needs in a highly versatile way and a bagful of other resources which enable it to survive even though it seems one of the most defenseless of creatures, a passive thing altogether at the mercy of its environment," . .
The oyster has an intricate pumping system far more involved ("more delicate and complex)" than was previously supposed. "With its pumping system the oyster couples a filtering system, for which it uses mucus. Very thin sheets of mucus pass continuously over the oyster's gills. This mucus traps food particles, and conveys them to the oysters mouth. Both the pumping and the filtering mechanisms are sensitive to environmental conditions; the oyster does NOT feed continuously: it tests the water from time to time, and it sets its intricate feeding mechanism into operation ONLY WHEN THE QUALITY OF THE WATER MEETS CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS. . . .Its chemical receptors apparently warn it not to feed when certain organic excretions or other poisons are in the water. And its filtering mechanism enables it to segregate from its intake and throw out organisms or particles which it presumably recognizes as inimical.
"The manufacture of the oysters shell is an intricate, fascinating operation. The mollusk has herds of small glands which secrete calcite . . . . It deposits the calcite on a thin network of protein, steadily enlarging and thickening the shell as it grows. The oyster does NOT use dissolved calcium carbonate, which is rather sparse in sea water, but it captures calcium ions. JUST HOW THE OYSTER CATCHES THOSE IONS AND POURS THEM OUT AGAIN THROUGH ITS SHELL-SECRETING GLANDS TO FORM THE CALCITE LAYER OF ITS SHELL IS UNKNOWN.
"The oyster has to create a home of a very different shape. . . . and its construction must be right the first time, for the shell cannot be broken down or remodeled. Investigators have been amazed to find that the oyster pads out the thick places in the shell with 'cheaper' construction - a chalky, porous deposit which requires only about one-fifth as much building material. JUST HOW IT CONTROLS THE MAKING OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF SHELL IS HARD TO UNDERSTAND.
"The two valves of the shell are hinged by a rubberlike elastic ligament which pushes the valves apart when the oyster does not hold them closed; the closing of the valves is controlled by a powerful central adductor muscle. This muscle has a 'quick' part which can open or snap the valves shut very rapidly, and a 'catch' part which can keep the shells closed for a long time, apparently without getting tired. . . " (Caps ours). (The rest of the article by Pieter Korringa gives many more fascinating facts).
Not the least of the achievements of the humble oyster - the Brainless Wonder - is the creation by the oyster (starting with an irritant; as a grain of sand) of a pearl - "the queen of gems." By what legerdemain can the oyster after many months transform an irritant into a "perfect, fully formed jewel, the iridescent pearl, that never requires polishing, cutting or other artificial methods to improve its beauty?"
Where did this "brainless Wonder" get such wisdom? Who taught it how to make its shell, and make it right the first time? Who gave the oyster the secret of capturing calcium ions - and also a high concentrate of copper, zinc, iron, manganese and rare metals (in concentrations thousands of times higher than in the surrounding sea water) - and put them into an easily digestible form for man, making the oyster a rich and succulent food for man? (Typist Note: While God did make the oyster, He did NOT MAKE IT AS FOOD FOR MAN. Read Leviticus 11:9-12). Who taught the oyster how to create the matchless pearl? Surely One infinitely Higher than any intelligence on earth designed this marvel and MADE IT FOR A PURPOSE.
As a matter of fact, we have not presented one-tenth of the "marvels" to be observed in the life history of the common oyster: the "Brainless Wonder."
(4) The Incredible Dance of the Grunion
The Bay of Fundy, Nova Scotia, lies at the end of a huge ocean basin, and the tidal movement is greater than anywhere else on earth: The water rises and falls through 50 feet or more. In Hawaii, on the other hand, the tides rise less than a foot. These Hawaiian tides are controlled almost entirely by the sun. The many influences that control the movement of tidal waters - the pull of the sun, the pull of the moon, the pull of both together or one against the other, storms at sea - have made theoretical predictions of tides a very intricate mathematical feat. But trained oceanographers can predict with accuracy how tides will run in different parts of the world.
How then can grunion (small silvery fish), without study or training, forecast the ever-changing tides? Yet they do, and with amazing accuracy!
"Grunion runs" are found only off the coast of lower and southern California, beginning in March and continuing through July. Thousands of grunion appear on the beaches to lay their eggs in the sand three or four nights after the new or full moon. "The forecasting of the hour and minute when grunion will run is reached by adding 15 minutes to the time the tide reaches its nightly peak. In other words, there is a margin of safety: they come ashore AFTER the turn of the tide, and on nights when the tide reaches a little less high than on the preceding night. . . . Thus the eggs are laid in sand which will NOT be reached by the tide for about two weeks.
"The female, heavy with eggs, permits herself to be washed in by the tide and strands herself. She energetically burrows into the sand tail first to a depth of two or three inches. The males then, in a horizontal position, curl their bodies around the partially buried females and discharge milt which runs down along the females' bodies and fertilizes the eggs which are being laid in the sand." The whole process lasts only about 30 seconds. The grunion then flop back into the sea, but the eggs, deposited on a night when the tide has begun to recede will NOT be washed out until the next high tide two weeks later. During the two weeks between the laying of the eggs and the next high tide, the eggs are incubated in the warm, damp sand. When the next high tide erodes the beach and uncovers the eggs, the eggs hatch explosively and the new-born fry swim out into the ocean!
Who teaches each NEW GENERATION of grunion how to time the tides, and know when it is 15 minutes AFTER high tide, the night after the fortnightly high tide? Who designed the grunion eggs to hatch in two weeks? and in a nest of damp sand? Who taught the female grunion to place the nest in the exact locale where the tide will expose the eggs two weeks later? One bows in awe before such miracles and concludes that the Creator of all so equipped the grunion with the necessary abilities that all people might have a constant recurring demonstration of DIVINE CREATION.
(5) The Spectacular Swarming of the Palolo Worm
The grunion is not alone in its uncanny time sense. The palolo worm puts on a similar demonstration. We refer to the Eunice viridis (palolo worm) of the South Pacific. This worm lives in deep, cavernous hollows at the base of sunken coral reefs in the ocean waters around Samoa, Fiji and some other Pacific islands south of the equator.
"Once each year, at a definite time, the palolo appears in myriads at the surface of the sea to perpetuate its species in a spectacular swarming. This takes place in the early spring, exactly one week after the full moon in November (Springtime, south of the equator) and occurs with such regularity each year that 'palolo time' is the outstanding date of the native calendar. . . .
"The worms grow to a maximum length of eighteen inches. As November approaches the hind part of each worm, which is about three times as long as the fore part, becomes filled and distended with minute eggs in the female and sperm in the male.
"When the moment arrives each worm crawls backwards out of its deep hole in the coral and the hind part breaks away and wriggles up to the surface. The fore part of each worm remains in the coral and grows a new hind end which, the following November, again supplies the eggs or the sperm for the perpetuation of this strange species.
"Almost immediately when the hind end of the palolo reaches the surface, it bursts and the eggs or sperm are fired into the water 'like an explosion.' The empty, shrunken remains of the worm then sink down to die on the sea-bed. The great majority of the countless millions of the palolo worms inhabiting the coral reefs in the South Pacific behave in this way once a year, in the early morning of the seventh day after the November full moon. Burrows says, 'the palolo makes its annual rising AT AN ACTUAL DATE BY THE MOON AND THE TIDE" year after year, without change or failure. (Animal Wonder World, pp, 153, 154).
Who taught the lowly Palolo worm how to discern "times and seasons?" How can it tell when it is exactly one week after the November full moon? And why does the new generation of palolo worms, the next year, and the next, and the next, never miss the date by even one day? Did the Creator have the natives in mind too, when he created such a huge stock of the edible Palolo worms, that they might know when to catch them? Whoever caused this phenomenon DESIGNED it so - and then when the pattern was set, He made it static, so that generation after generation, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CHANGE WHATEVER IN THE PROCEDURE.
(6) Fish with Built-in Dynamos
The electric eel (Electrophorus eleotircus) is a native of the backwaters of the Amazon. Four-fifths of the length of his stubby body contains electricity-generating tissue, which enables him to send out discharges up to 500 volts many times each minute!
"When a piranha or other foe of the eel comes too close, Electrophorus builds an electric fence around himself by switching on his generators and charging the water in the vicinity with electricity. With his enemies stunned by the shock, it is an easy matter for the eel to escape."
"The current from the electric eel may be released from any part of the fish with equal intensity; it is directional, having one polarity at the head and another at the tail; the fish can regulate the amount it discharges."
The electric catfish has a novel way of getting its meals - even though it is somewhat revolting. Swimming boldly up to a large fish, it slyly touches it on the stomach with a fin and gives it an electric shock - a shock that does not kill it, but causes it to disgorge any half-digested food before the stunned fish seeks to make a hasty get-away. The catfish eats the free lunch and then looks for another victim of its practical joke. (See p. 17, "Nature Parade").
But the champion electrician of all is the Electric Ray, Its electric equipment is so astounding, we must quote a detailed description.
"The electric organs of the electric rays are exceedingly complicated and only a genius in the field of electricity could fully understand them. . . . These electric organs are a complicated wet battery. There are about 450 special tubes in each of the organs supplying the positive and negative currents, all separated from each other by special insulating tissue. There are many electric plates, and the wet medium (corresponding to the acid solution in a man-made wet battery) is a clear jelly. There are special nerves going to every plate which comes from a main nerve which itself is connected to a separate section of the brain that deals solely with electricity. . . .The electric ray's 'batteries' consist of two nodes, one positive and the other negative, which have to be connected before a discharge takes place. A powerful shock is then given of a frequency as high as one hundred fifty per second. This kills small creatures and is quite enough to knock a man flat on the ground. . . .
:Nature, in fact rather surprisingly, has shown herself here (and in other electric fishes) to be a skilled and inventive electrician. I say surprisingly because with most other animals she has given no hint that she knew anything much about the subject." (The Living Sea, pp. 130, 131).
Can any honest, thinking persons read that description and not come to the conclusion that the God who created all things, who knows all the secrets of electricity, as well as gravity and all other natural laws, is the One who made the electric ray?
(7) The Strange Case of the Fish Hatched in Father's Mouth
In the fish world parenthood at times is more trouble to the father than the mother. We already have spoken of the male of the sea horse that carries the eggs of the female in a pouch on its belly. The male Tilapia macrocephala is also an exceptionally devoted father - or shall we say he is a hen-pecked husband. The Tilapia, about three inches long, lives in the rivers of Africa.
"After the female has laid the eggs and the male has fertilized them, the male picks up the eggs and carries them around in his mouth like a bunch of marbles. He keeps them there until they hatch and the young Tilapia are large enough to fend for themselves. During this two-week period the father cannot eat a bite, and he has to exist off his own tissue. The family life of the Tilapia has been studied for 15 years at the Museum of Natural History in New York city by Dr. Lester R. Aronson, who also has been to Nigeria observing them in their natural habitat.
"The female Tilapia scoops a hole in the gravel at the bottom of the river with her mouth. She then lays eggs, about 80 of them, in this nest. The male drops sperm on the eggs, then darts head first toward the nest, scooping up a few more eggs with each plunge, until he finally has gotten them all into his mouth. If he overlooks a few, the female slaps him with her tail to remind him he has left a few in the nest - but this happens only rarely. Crammed with eggs, the males mouth bulges. The eggs hatch in about five days, but he usually keeps his youngsters in his mouth for about six days more."
Anyone who knows the tendency of the typical male to shun household duties can see in this nothing short of a miracle! And all who know the male appetite can see in this a double miracle - for by what natural power was the male Tilpia ever persuaded to keep from eating for eleven days? This is the more wonderful when one remembers that many species of fish eat not only their own eggs but also their fry as well. Going counter to the natural tendencies of other fish, the male Tilpia performs, without remonstrance, a specialized function in the propagation of the species that MUST have been "born into it" by a Superintending Providence, and could NOT have evolved by natural processes.
(8) The Mystifying, Clever Crabs
Crabs, lobsters, oysters - all are relatively low in the scale of life - and yet the crab gives evidence of cleverness bordering on apparent intelligence. The whole life story of the crab is unbelievable.
"When the egg of a crab hatches, a speck emerges that moults within an hour and turns into a tiny creature THAT BEARS NO RESEMBLANCE WHATEVER TO A CRAB. It is only about one-twentieth of an inch long, translucent, and carries two long spears, one on the middle of its back and the other projecting in front, like a beak. It has large eyes, set flat and NOT on the tips of stalks like those of its parents. (This incredible fact is an insoluble riddle to all naturalists). It swims actively. (Most adult crabs do not swim at all). Other moults (stages of growth) take place during which the baby crab presents an astonishing variety of COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SHAPES. (This periodic metamorphosis is absolutely inscrutable to zoologists). Finally, however, it loses the gift of swimming and sinks to the sea bed, still exceedingly minute, but now a replica of its parents in every way - stalked eyes, pincers, and the rest.
"The last creature from which one would expect intelligence is a crab. Yet if one judges by behavior, certain crabs possess considerable intelligence and cunning. It has been said that men are the only animals to have learned to carry weapons. The monkey may hurl a coconut from the top of a tree but it never carries a stick. Man however was not the first creature to carry weapons; the crab had been doing this long before. . . . To what extent the crab knows what it is doing does not concern us: it does it. It will be said that only those crabs survived that carried these weapons and so the process became aut