Friday, April 8, 2011

When is a duck not a duck?

Edgar Andrews in his book "Who made God?" describes how scientists agree that the DNA of living things is imprinted with informaiton in a manner reminiscent of an advanced modern language. As I understand Andrews without this organsised language written in a comprehensible way, life itself cannot exist.

In his book Andrews says that in the same way that that if a monkey started to type random letters on a computer key board - it would never in a million years produce the works of Shakespeare, this advanced language could never be written by accident - it needed a designer: "I was brought up to believe the duck theorum - 'if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck it is probably ... a duck'. That is why I have problems with people who
(1) admit that nature gives every evidence of being intelligently designed;
(2) introduces an alternative materialistic explanation for the appearance of design; and then
(3) without further discussion conclude that only their alternative explanation can be true.

Meet the neo duckians, whose logic demands that 'if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is indubitably a chicken.' Such are those who tell us that the cell's molecular language is merely an acident of nature. We have seen that storage and use of information in the living cell exhibits many, if not all, the characteristics of human language.

Let's set this out clearly: 1. As in human language the cell employs a code, specifically a four symbol alphabet. 2. As in human language, the cell organises its symbols into words (codons) 3. As in human language, the words have an agreed meaning so they can be recognised by the ribosomes and 'translated' into an alternative amino acid 'language'. 4. As in human languages, punctuation is used to demarcate genes. 5. As in human language, words are organised into instructions that specify which one of many possible proteins is to be made by copying a given gene. 6. As in human language, the cells language has a purpose - namely to construct protein sequences that will fold in specific ways to provide functional keys and catalysts to operate the cell.

In other words, the molecular information system in living cells not only resembles a language - it is a language and it looks remarkably like intelligent design." But it isn't any intelligent designer that Andrews is proposing but more specifically no other than the Creator God of the Bible. In his brilliant book which throughout argues a hypothesis for the God of the Bible he states that we shouldn't be surprised that life requires such an advanced language to exist. After all the Bible is quite clear that God spoke his creation into existance!