Does Evolutionism Make Sense?

     Does evolutionism actually make sense? Evolutionists are trying to find life in the universe, and according to their paradigm, if life happened here on earth, then it should be elsewhere in the universe. In their search to find life, the question arises, how would evolutionary scientists know when they have found other intelligence in the universe?

     As in the movie Contact, if we were to receive a signal from outer space, a beep, beep, beep signal in a recognizable pattern, we would think other intelligent life created the signal. Anyone would agree with this proposition. For the record, this has never happened yet, and there have been some signals that have had a repeatable pattern, for example, a pulsar. Therefore, it is understandable why the SETI search goes on.

     But the real rub comes right here on earth. The DNA molecule is far more complex than anyone has ever imagined. As in the movie Contact, the signal received is loaded with information, but here on earth, there is so much information within the DNA molecule, that is in a recognizable pattern, it is hard to understand why evolutionists cannot see this molecule for what it is. DNA was created by an Intelligent Designer/Creator, plain and simple.

     If evolutionists are so willing to think a simple beep, beep, beep from deep space would prove there are other intelligent beings in the universe, how can these same people be so gullible to think all the complexity within the DNA molecule, which all life depends, could arise from mindless accidental sheer luck processes?

     A similar example is found in the movie, 2001 a Space Odyssey. A rectangular monolith is found on the moon. It appears to be nothing special, but it does give off a strange signal. Something similar is found orbiting Jupiter, so goes the movie. There is no question, by anyone in the audience, that these objects were created from some form of intelligent life. The rub comes at the end of the movie when a new born baby, with an extraordinary big eye, comes back to earth. Why can’t the evolutionary scientists figure out, the baby, just like the monolith, needed intelligence to create the baby too? No matter what the monolith can do, it is nowhere as complex as the child, but somehow this point is overlooked. Is this just an accidental mental lapse by mainstream evolutionary scientists?

     Which leads to a third point: can accidental random chance actually be the creator of rational thought? If it is, can we beyond doubt trust our accidental rational thought as being trustworthy? It is far saner to think rational thought came from a Rational Designer/Creator than accidental random processes or sheer luck mechanisms. How can evolutionists actually believe their rationale came from irrational sheer luck processes and then tell the world to trust in their reasoning capabilities? What is wrong with this picture?

     Many evolutionists say they have never seen any evidence for Intelligent Design/Creation, but as in the examples stated above, only self-induced blindness causes them to deny the obvious. How can evolutionists actually be this way? The only answer to this question is the fact that evolutionists have a predetermined commitment to Atheism, their religion. To keep faith in their religious dogma, the evolutionists will only consider scientific evidence that is in line with a naturalistic evolutionary explanation. They have already predetermined not to let a Divine foot into the door no matter how ludicrous their rationale is. How in the world can they think they are open-minded, rational, and scientific?

Mr. Stephen J. Miller