Darwin Never Met Aliens

[dropcap]God[/dropcap] is responsible for the spiritual entities within our bodies, and more likely, aliens are the most likely candidates for the geniuses behind the amazing nanotech DNA which designs our life form physical bodies; there is no argument required.

There are many predominant planets whose entire intelligent life forms are spiritual entities who have no physical DNA required to house such a spirit being.

Our physical world is an anomaly, by virtue of the sheer numbers of many such noncorporeal worlds, by comparison.

Does human DNA reflect a computer code, an alien nanotech, and thus the not so hidden hidden fingerprint of a “Creator”?

Scientists have found that our genetic code has all of these key elements.

“The coding regions of DNA,” expostulates Dr. Stephen Meyer, “have exactly the same relevant properties as a computer code or language” (quoted by Strobel, p. 237, The Case for a Creator, 2004)

Whose mind or what entity could shrink and miniaturize such information and place our DNA‘s enormous number of ‘letters’ in their correct sequence as a genetic building block instruction manual?

Could evolution in itself have progressively come up with a nanotech system like this?

It is difficult to fathom, but the quantum of information in our human DNA is roughly comparably equal to 12 sets of The Encyclopedia Britannica-an amazing 384 volumes worth of detailed data that would fill 48 feet long of required library shelves .

Yet in their precise size-only two millionths of a millimeter thick-a teaspoon of DNA, according to molecular biologist Michael Denton, has “all the information needed to build the proteins for all the species of organisms that have ever lived on the earth, and there would still be enough room left for all the information in every book ever written” (Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 996, p.

God is responsible for spiritual entities within, aliens are the geniuses behind nanotech DNA which is our physical bodies. Most planetary intelligent spiritual entities need no physical DNA to house a being. “p. 334).

Intelligent Design of our Human DNA

As scientists began to unravel and decode the human DNA molecule, they found something amazingly unexpected-a computer programmer’s exquisite ‘language’ composed of some 3 billion genetic letters.

“One of the most extraordinary discoveries of the twentieth century,” says Dr. Stephen Meyer, director of the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, Wash., “was that DNA actually stores information-the detailed instructions for assembling proteins-in the form of a four-character digital code” (quoted by Lee Strobel, The Case for a Creator, 2004, p. 224).

As George Williams explains it: “The gene is a package of information, not an object. The pattern of base pairs in a DNA molecule specifies the gene. But the DNA molecule is the medium, it’s not the message” (quoted by Johnson, p. 70).

Design from an intelligent source

To any discerning mind, this type of nanotech high-level information has been deduced to originate only from a seemingly intelligent source.

As Lee Strobel explains: “The data at the core of life is not disorganized, it’s not simply orderly like salt crystals, but it’s complex and specific information that can accomplish a bewildering task-the building of biological machines that far outstrip human technological capabilities” (p. 244).

For example, the precise nature of this genetic language is such that the average error that is not caught turns out to be one error per 10 billion letters.

If an error occurs in one of the most important parts of the code, in the genes, it causes diseases such as sickle-cell anemia. Yet even the best and most apt typist in the world couldn’t come close to making only one mistake per 10 billion letters-far from it.

Michael Behe, a biochemist and professor at Pennsylvania’s Lehigh University, explains that DNA genetic data is primarily an instruction manual.

He reasons: “Consider a step-by-step list of [genetic] instructions. A mutation is a change in one of the lines of instructions. So instead of saying, “Take a 1/4-inch nut,” a mutation might say, “Take a 3/8-inch nut.” Or instead of “Place the round peg in the round hole,” we might get “Place the round peg in the square hole” . . . What a mutation cannot do is change all the instructions in one step-say, [providing instructions] to build a fax machine instead of a radio” (Darwin’s Black Box, 996, p. 41).

We therefore have in our human genetic code an huge complex instruction manual that appears to have been eloquently designed by a morehighlyintelligentsource

What’s Popular Now: