There are obvious differences between the Creation and Evolution paradigms. One important difference is the understanding of how entropy fits in the puzzle of our origins. As usual, it seems that creationary and evolutionary science goes in opposite directions. The Creationist sees our whole Biosphere as increasing in entropy since Creation. The Evolutionist, on the other hand, sees that the increase in entropy does not have to proceed if outside energy is added to the system thus allowing useful work to be done.
There have been a lot of arguing over the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Creationists use the law to teach that everything runs down hill. Entropy increases. They teach that life in general, on our planet, is running down hill from its original position of functionality, and that while natural selection helps the survivors, it does not with the addition of mutations, reverse the increase of entropy. Higher forms of life do not originate from lower forms of life. This idea, they say, goes against the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
Evolutionists see that entropy can decrease because the Earth is not a closed system. Only in closed systems does entropy automatically increase. If there is an outside source of energy, like the sun, they say that this energy from the sun is used in Biology to reverse the increase in entropy. So they see it possible that higher forms of life can arise from lower life-forms. This idea, they say, agrees perfectly with the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
This is an interesting controversy. I tend to disagree with both sides. I do not believe that life on our planet follows the 2nd law of thermodynamics because the law does not fully describe the process. If we were talking about a simple matter such as energy or heat, I can see that the 2nd law of thermodynamics would describe the process very well. And if we were looking at something like energy or heat, the Evolutionists would be correct. The Earth is not a closed system. Hence, we cannot categorically state that entropy must increase over time.
However, we are not looking at problems that only involve energy and heat, we are talking about complex information molecules. We are talking about the most complicated machines on Earth, living organisms. When outside energy is added, that energy can either help the organism survive (providing food) or it can completely destroy (destructive energy such as excess heat, light).
When looking at energy or heat within the context of the 2nd law of thermodynamics, we do not have to ask if energy will be added constructively or destructively. No, we know that energy can only be added or taken away from the system by an outside source. Those are the options.
Biological systems behave very differently. If we start frying an egg, the energy added to the egg does not provide energy for the future chick, rather, the added energy destroys any chance of future life. The protein is denatured. On the other hand, if we keep the temperature at the Biological range, we will be allowing a very complicated system of enzymes to break down yolk and albumin (energy from the sun) to form useful molecules of energy that can be used constructively in the growth of a chicken embryo. So a live chicken will hatch from the egg. In both instances, energy was added to the egg, in the first example, the energy was destructive, in the second example, the energy was constructive. The energy was the right amount and in the right form allowing the enzymes to work.
In Biological systems, energy is controlled and directed by very specific enzymatic systems to ensure that an organism can survive and thrive. These enzymatic systems determine what living organisms can and cannot do. There is no mechanism known that allows Biological organisms to direct this external energy, from the sun, constructively to the task of increasing it's complexity! The only mechanisms I am familiar with, is the random mutation process and natural selection. Neither one of these processes are able to reverse the increase of entropy. They do not constructively add energy to increase the complexity of an organism.
There is no possible enzymatic mechanism for allowing entropy to decrease. It does not exist; The evidence shows that we might as well be living in a closed system. The energy from the sun is only destructive to life unless there are very specific enzymatic systems to ensure that the energy is used constructively. There is no enzymatic system for promoting evolution at all. The random mutational process and natural selection are only able to slow the gain in entropy. That is all it can do. It is not a mechanism for harnessing power from the sun to perform some function on the genes, it is only a process that saves those who survive. In addition, random mutations is a entropy increasing process in of itself!
In 1980 Lewis Thomas, who was chancellor of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York; He states that he is also having trouble with the idea that random mutations can explain what we see in nature:
"I cannot make my peace with the randomness doctrine; I cannot abide the notion of purposelessness and blind chance in nature. And yet I do not know what to put in its place for the quieting of my mind. It is absurd to say that a place like this place is absurd, when it contains, in front of our eyes, so many billions of different forms of life, each one in its way absolutely perfect, all linked together to form what would surely seem to an outsider a huge, spherical organism. We talk - some of us, anyway - about the absurdity of the human situation, but we do this because we do not know how we fit in, or what we are for. The stories we used to make up to explain ourselves do not make sense anymore, and we have run out of new stories, for the moment." Thomas L. 1980. On the uncertainty of science. Harvard Magazine 83(1):19-22.
How can random mutations and blind chance produce billions of different forms of life, each one in its way absolutely perfect? Lewis Thomas made his statement back in 1980. That was more than 30 years ago. Yet there is still no known mechanism that utilizes energy from the sun to allow life-forms to advance to higher levels of existence. If there was an answer, you can be sure that you would have heard of it from all directions!
Rather, the opposite is happening. Eventually all life on our planet will die. I do not mean to indicate only individuals, all populations of life will die on the earth. The whole Biosphere is dying! Every year, hundreds of species are disappearing off the face of the earth and there are no new species to take their place. If time were to last long enough, all life would cease to exist on the earth. Entropy (if we want to call it that) has been increasing since man's fall into sin. and the only way to reverse the process is to be cured by the Creator Himself!
Pseudogenes most likely are the result of degradation. They have lost their original created function. So, If true, some parts of the cell might not have a purpose.
Please criticize or comment
WebMaster: Michael Brown
Copyright © 1998 - 2013 by Michael Brown all rights reserved
Officially posted June 19, 1998
last revised January 1, 2013