| For years scientists have been telling us how the | | | | of the laws of nature on every level. So, it might be |
| universe began. Do we really know? Or do we need | | | | more scientific to take this into account rather than |
| another six billions years to figure it out?To date, our | | | | adopt a fantasy which cannot be scientifically or |
| space explorations, manned and unmanned, have | | | | logically substantiated.THE DOUBLE STANDARDThere |
| uncovered a world of intriguing, perplexing, puzzling, | | | | seems to be a double standard in logic by which |
| fascinating, and even awe-inspiring phenomena. | | | | some people accept scientific theories. When the |
| Whether we understand it or not, the universe we | | | | layman accepts theories of evolution without |
| live in seems to be a highly organized system or set | | | | possessing much knowledge of them, he obviously |
| of smaller systems functioning in harmony. All of its | | | | puts his trust and faith in those who perpetuate |
| components work within a framework of very | | | | these theories. This trust is sometimes expressed as |
| structured, precise, and clearly defined laws of | | | | "they're the scientists, they must know what they're |
| nature. If this were not so, the universe could not | | | | talking about." And it is this kind of blind allegiance |
| possibly have survived in its present state of | | | | which sets the layman's science-related logic on a |
| complexity for any long period of time, certainly not | | | | different level than the logic he uses in daily life.How |
| for thousands of years. If the laws of gravity were | | | | so?To date, virtually every planet and moon explored |
| to cease functioning for only one moment, all orbiting | | | | in our solar system has proved to be full of |
| bodies throughout the universe would move into | | | | inexplicable puzzles, mysteries, and contradictions of |
| different orbits. For life on earth, this would be | | | | theories (as pointed out in other chapters in |
| catastrophic. If the "strong force" which holds | | | | EvolutionDead.com). Some of these discoveries are |
| together sub-atomic particles were to cease | | | | beyond present scientific understanding. Some are |
| functioning, all matter in the universe would | | | | even beyond anything we expect to understand in |
| disintegrate. Obviously, the laws of nature function | | | | years to come. In addition, some events outside our |
| every moment of every day, with utmost | | | | solar system are so baffling that scientists can only |
| precision.Our universe contains atomic and sub-atomic | | | | explain them with strange entities like black holes and |
| particles not visible to the naked eye and sometimes | | | | quasars, which are themselves only theoretical. Some |
| not even visible with sophisticated instruments. It also | | | | events outside our solar system cannot be explained |
| contains planets, stars, huge galaxies spanning | | | | even with theoretical science. Some events on the |
| hundreds of thousands of lightyears across space -- | | | | quantum level are so baffling that they seem to defy |
| some of which are so far from earth that they | | | | common sense and logic.So, how is it that when it |
| appear as mere specks in the sky -- and galaxies | | | | comes to explaining "how it all began," scientists give |
| billions of lightyears apart. The laws of nature are so | | | | the impression of having a sufficient understanding of |
| complex that they support millions of forms of life on | | | | the laws of nature governing the entire universe |
| our planet while maintaining the integrity of the | | | | allegedly billions of years ago? Wouldn't one first need |
| cosmos as a whole. It would be difficult, if not | | | | at least an impeccable understanding of what is |
| impossible, for the most intelligent human being to | | | | happening in his own backyard, our solar system, |
| even imagine a more complex system, let alone | | | | before explaining the mechanics of the entire |
| come up with a functioning design of anything nearly | | | | universe? Surely the entire universe is more complex |
| as complex.And as much as modern man has already | | | | than our "puny little" solar system. And wouldn't such |
| learned, we're just beginning to see the tip of the | | | | an "expert" have to possess an impeccable |
| iceberg concerning the complexities of the laws of | | | | understanding of quantum mechanics as well as the |
| nature. There have been people who have devoted | | | | mechanics of distant heavenly bodies in his own time |
| virtually their entire lives to discovering and studying | | | | before attempting to describe events which allegedly |
| the laws of nature. Doctors have studied medicine. | | | | brought all of these entities into existence billions of |
| Astronomers have studied the skies. Biologists have | | | | years ago? Certainly events billions of years in the |
| studied vast numbers of life forms. Physicists have | | | | past cannot be easier to decipher than events in our |
| studied the laws of nature governing the cosmos | | | | own time. So how can anyone seriously claim to |
| right down to those governing events on the | | | | understand how our universe developed into its |
| quantum level. And the list goes on. Yet, not one of | | | | present state?Perhaps it is necessary to go into the |
| these endeavors has thus far resulted in the | | | | dimensions of our universe to put this question into |
| complete knowledge of even one subject. I'm not | | | | proper perspective:The diameter of our sun is about |
| talking about knowing everything about every | | | | 865,400 miles. Our solar system is about 9 billion miles |
| subject. I'm talking about knowing everything about | | | | in diameter. Our nearest neighbors outside our solar |
| only one subject. It hasn't happened yet. And you'd | | | | system are the stars Proxima and Alpha Centtauri, |
| think that after all the scientific discoveries, | | | | each about 4 lightyears away. (One lightyear is about |
| achievements, and sophistication of the twenty-first | | | | 6 trillion miles, the distance light travels -- at 186,000 |
| century, such knowledge might at least lie in the | | | | miles per second -- in one year.) These stars are only |
| foreseeable future. But that doesn't seem to be the | | | | two of the billions of stars which make up our |
| case either. In many instances, it's quite the contrary. | | | | galaxy, the Milky Way. An average galaxy is believed |
| Some branches of science seem to become | | | | to have a diameter of approximately 100,000 |
| increasingly elusive in direct proportion to our | | | | lightyears. The Milky Way is only one galaxy in a local |
| sophistication. For the "cut and dried" physical world | | | | group of 30 galaxies spanning a total of about 3 |
| this is supposed to be, this kind of complexity almost | | | | million lightyears across space -- if you travelled at |
| rivals spiritualism itself.Now, an intelligent person would | | | | the unimaginable speed of light, it would take you |
| ask himself, "Where did all this complex ingenuity | | | | about 3 million years to cross this local group of only |
| come from?"A 'BIG BANG?'There is a theory | | | | 30 galaxies.It is estimated that there are at least fifty |
| generally referred to by scientists as the "big bang." | | | | billion galaxies in the universe.When you think about |
| No, it has nothing to do with the fourth of July. | | | | these proportions for a moment, you begin to realize |
| When the fourth of July ends, we're usually left with | | | | the awesomeness of this place we so casually refer |
| a lot of exploded shreds of garbage. When this | | | | to as our universe.Then, after hearing the theories |
| purported "big bang" ended, it allegedly left us with | | | | behind the phenomena believed to exist deep in |
| debris which somehow evolved into a highly complex | | | | space -- black holes, supergiants, supernovae, |
| and organized universe. How? Beats the heck out me. | | | | quasars, pulsars, neutron stars -- you begin to realize |
| Let's see if it beats the heck out of you.Big-bang | | | | that the "other end" of the universe is not only far |
| theorists hold that the universe roughly fifteen or | | | | away but also holds wonders which only a few years |
| twenty billion years ago. There was this "something | | | | ago would have been considered somewhere |
| or other" which exploded. Since then the universe has | | | | between science fiction and the absurd. Even today, |
| been expanding. Everything in it evolved from the | | | | most of these objects are speculative and far from |
| stuff of that explosion.Let's see if we understand | | | | pat concepts.Is this the universe which came into |
| this. In spite of the fact that just about any kind of | | | | existence through a series of accidents billions of |
| an explosion we could cause would result in nothing | | | | years ago? And who are the ones perpetuating this? |
| but chaos and destruction, we're being told, against all | | | | The same people who have given us "pat" answers |
| logic, that an explosion is what began the process of | | | | about our own solar system in our own time?We do |
| building the inconceivably complex system we now | | | | not yet understand how phenomena deep in space |
| call our universe. Isn't that a bit like saying that if you | | | | work in our time. We do not yet understand how our |
| blew up a Rubik's cube the little pieces could | | | | solar system works in our time. We do not yet |
| conceivably become more complex than the original | | | | completely understand how our own planet, earth, |
| cube? It is common sense that an explosion will | | | | works in our time. We do not yet understand how |
| create a general state of fragmentation and disarray. | | | | many living organisms on our planet work in our time. |
| After ripping a system apart, isn't it rather absurd to | | | | We do not yet understand how even some small |
| expect the resulting chaos to become more intricate | | | | organisms of the bacteria and virus variety work in |
| and organized than the original system? When you | | | | our time. We do not yet understand how sub-atomic |
| think about it, after an explosion, it is unrealistic to | | | | particles, so fundamental to our existence, work in |
| expect a system to even maintain its previous level | | | | our time. But, somehow, we do understand the |
| of complexity, let alone evolve into something more | | | | process which allegedly brought all of this into being |
| complex.An example: If you took every nut, bolt, and | | | | billions of years ago and caused it to evolve. Is |
| part necessary for the construction of a car, piled | | | | someone pulling our leg?How can anyone simply |
| them up on top of a bomb, and blew them up, would | | | | accept theories of how a universe of such |
| you ever expect the parts to fall down into a | | | | unimaginable proportions and complexity came into |
| functioning car by mere chance? How many times | | | | being from the same scientists who seem so |
| would you say you'd have to blow the pieces up to | | | | confused every time we send a rocket to explore an |
| get a functioning car? Fifteen million? Seventeen | | | | area of space only a stone's throw from earth? How |
| billion? Or do you think it could never happen? Sure | | | | can anyone accept theories of the origin of our |
| the pieces would fall into different configurations and | | | | universe, which implicitly include the origin of the basic |
| shapes after each explosion -- configurations which | | | | elements of matter and life, when these same |
| may be pleasant to look at with an abstract, artistic | | | | elements are not yet understood today? Isn't it |
| eye. Configurations which may even inspire you with | | | | obvious that our comprehension of the universe is |
| thoughts like, "Where's the broom?" But to think that | | | | shallow, at best?SHORTCOMINGS OF OUR |
| you could eventually get into a car and drive off is | | | | UNDERSTANDING OF THE BIG BANGIn 1998 |
| confusing the laws of probability with intelligent | | | | scientists discovered something that baffled the heck |
| design. If you blow up the pieces of a car, all you will | | | | out of them. Our understanding of the expanding |
| ever get is a pile of junk. And maybe a few lumps on | | | | universe was that it might eventually collapse under |
| your head from falling debris. But that's about it.The | | | | its own gravitational pull. Or, if its gravitational pull was |
| scientifically accepted theory of the origin and | | | | not strong enough, it would just keep expanding, but |
| evolution of our universe says, in effect, that if you | | | | at a slower rate, much like any other explosion.What |
| blew up the parts of a car you could get a lot more | | | | scientists discovered, however, was that the |
| than just a car -- you could accidentally get a | | | | universe's rate of expansion was speeding up! This |
| supersonic jet or a space shuttle! This is a better | | | | was absolutely astounding. There was, and still is, no |
| story than what used car dealers give | | | | science to explain this. Sure we have more theories |
| you.UNSUPPORTED BY SCIENCE ITSELFIf the idea | | | | (dark matter, being the major one), but at the |
| that chaos cannot accidentally turn into design and | | | | moment it's all a big mystery.What this boils down to |
| organization makes sense to you, congratulations! | | | | is that we've had pretty much of a "pat" theory for |
| You have something of a knack for thermodynamics. | | | | about a half a century, based on what we thought |
| The second law of thermodynamics states that | | | | was solid science. Then, reality threw us a curve, and |
| energy decreases in utility, moving from a state of | | | | our most fundamental understanding of the universe |
| order to disorder and finally to a stage of | | | | went out the window.WHERE'S THE LOGICThis is |
| randomness and decay.The notion that a "big bang" | | | | where the big puzzle of the double standard comes |
| can be the seed for a universe such as ours is in | | | | in. The greatest mystery of all is how some people |
| direct violation of this law. In a big bang scenario, | | | | put trust and faith into scientific theories when, given |
| rather than order turning into disorder, the precise | | | | the same circumstances in a more practical situation, |
| opposite happens -- chaos not only turns into | | | | the absurdity would be conspicuously obvious to |
| organization, but into an ingenious system of mind | | | | them. Suppose you had your bicycle checked out by |
| boggling complexity. This doesn't coincide with | | | | a mechanic who gave you a three hour speech on |
| scientific principles, and it certainly doesn't hold up | | | | how bicycles work. He described in depth the physics |
| logically.When confronted with the second law of | | | | of pulleys, gears, momentum, and friction, then told |
| thermodynamics as it relates to the evolution of life, | | | | you that your bike was in excellent shape. But the |
| many scientists respond that this law does not apply | | | | moment you got on your bike it fell apart. Would you |
| to an "open system." Earth, they say, is an open | | | | go back to the same "mechanic" to have your car |
| system since it is influenced by extraterrestrial | | | | checked out? Would you fly a plane that had been |
| systems. So, let's say you cannot use this argument | | | | okayed by this mechanic? Who, in his right mind, |
| against life on earth. But, how do you do away with | | | | would reason, "He may be dishonest or ignorant |
| the second law of thermodynamics when it comes | | | | about bicycles, but, after that speech on pulleys and |
| to the entire universe? The entire universe cannot | | | | gears, he must be competent when it comes to |
| possibly be an open system -- there are no outside | | | | planes and other complicated mechanics." Most people |
| systems to influence it. Even if we were to discover | | | | would not allow this crook to adjust their kites, let |
| "other universes" (of anti-matter, for example), it | | | | alone evaluate the condition of their planes.Why, |
| would still not make our universe an open system. | | | | then, does it not seem odd to these same people |
| Anything we discover becomes part of the "big | | | | that scientists have little problem figuring out how a |
| picture" of our entire universe or part of one big | | | | vast and complex universe with the staggering |
| super universe. Thus, after all is included, we | | | | dimensions of hundreds of billions of lightyears of |
| inevitably wind up with one huge closed system. How | | | | space allegedly worked billions of years ago, yet |
| did this entire system turn into a workable machine | | | | have difficulty understanding how our "drop in the |
| of inconceivable sophistication by accident?Answer: It | | | | bucket" solar system works today? How do |
| didn't, because it couldn't.There is no logical or | | | | scientists go from relative ignorance of the laws of |
| scientific basis whatsoever for an entire universe to | | | | nature of our own solar system in our own time to a |
| develop out of chaos. Such an occurrence would | | | | well rounded understanding of the forces behind the |
| need an "outside" force. And since we've already | | | | entire universe in a time long gone?The answer, of |
| included literally "everything" in our definition of "our | | | | course, is that scientists obviously do not have a well |
| universe," there are no outside forces left. | | | | rounded understanding of the physics and mechanics |
| Consequently, since our universe is in existence and is | | | | of our universe today, and certainly cannot have any |
| in a complex state, its only possible origin would have | | | | kind of a decent understanding of the universe in the |
| to be a force not within the confines of our physical | | | | past. The objective here is not to malign scientists. |
| world. In short, we'd be talking about a force unlike | | | | They obviously do understand the science behind cell |
| anything we are acquainted with on a physical or | | | | phones, rockets, heart surgery, etc. We have proof |
| scientific level -- quite conceivably something of a | | | | of that. But how the universe (or life, for that |
| spiritual nature. Perhaps it is this spiritual aspect, the | | | | matter) began, that's a different story. Readily |
| only true logical option, which scientists are trying to | | | | accepting accounts of the origin and evolution of our |
| avoid.Without getting involved in the spiritual | | | | universe only shows a tolerance for misinformation in |
| implications of our physical universe for the moment, | | | | scientific matters which goes far beyond what one |
| let us note what is relevant here: the structure of | | | | would accept in more practical circumstances. If you |
| our universe, like genetics, shows a high degree of | | | | find these theories fun, that's great. But if truth is of |
| intelligence and sophistication in its design and | | | | concern to you, proceed with caution.by Josh |
| implementation. Perhaps the intelligence required is so | | | | Greenberger |
| overwhelming that some individuals simply find it too | | | | This has been an excerpt from his free book on |
| mind-boggling to consider. But attributing the | | | | evolution at EvolutionDead.comJosh Greenberger: A |
| super-phenomenal feat of the development of our | | | | computer consultant for over two decades, the |
| universe to an accident of chance is not the answer. | | | | author has developed software for such |
| Aside from it not being scientific, it falls somewhat | | | | organizations as NASA's Goddard Institute of Space |
| short of sound, level-headed thinking. There's certainly | | | | Studies, AT&T, Charles Schwab, Bell Laboratories and |
| no evidence supporting such an accident. The mere | | | | Chase Manhattan Bank. Since 1984, the author's |
| existence of our universe does not prove it was | | | | literary works have appeared in such periodicals as |
| formed by accident. If anything, our universe does | | | | The New York Post, The Daily News, The Village |
| give every indication of having been designed with | | | | Voice, The Jewish Press, and others. His articles have |
| intelligence. Studying just about any branch of science | | | | ranged from humor to scientific to topical events. |
| will tell you, without any great reasoning abilities, that | | | | Visit his site: shopndrop. |
| there is intelligence in the design and implementation | | | | |