In the Beginning:  Science and Genesis 1-11

Class Nine - Information and Day 6

Let’s look at that information PP


we are referring to.  Does this DVD PP



contain more information than was required to make it?  Of course not, yet that is what evolution posits.  PP








To go from an amoeba to man requires PP an astronomical (inconceivably great) increase in information!  Yet evolution by definition is a materialistic (matter is all there is), mechanistic process.  Yet information is an intangible and intangibles cannot be addressed by a materialistic, mechanistic process. 

Here PP



we have depicted two discs, one a blank CD and the other containing an hour-long video.  What is the difference in the weight of these two discs?  Zero!  Because the video is made of information, which is an intangible!

So let’s take a look PP




at information theory, specifically 10 scientific laws about information.  For more information on what we are about to view I refer you to PP






In the Beginning Was Information by Dr. Werner Gitt.  You saw Dr. Gitt on a video last week. 

Scientific laws about information:  PP

1.  Anything material, such as physical/chemical processes, cannot create something non-material.  PP

2.  Information is a non-material fundamental entity and NOT a property of matter (remember our disc comparison).  PP



3.  Information requires a material medium for storage and transmission.  PP


 4.  Information cannot originate in statistical processes (random chance).  Since we’ve mentioned chance, Let’s take a couple of minutes to look at chance, the third part of the evolution trinity of matter, time and chance.  Pierre-Paul Grasse, a noted French zoologist, says, PP






“Directed by all-powerful selection (there’s that term again), chance becomes a sort of providence (the care exercised by God over the universe), which, under the cover of atheism, is not named but which is secretly worshiped.” 

I want to quote directly from R. C. Sproul’s book Not A Chance: PP





 ‘As long as chance rules, God is an anachronism. ... It is true that if chance rules, God cannot.  We can go fur- is not necessary for chance to rule in order to sup      plant God.   All it needs to do the job is to exist.  PP







The mere existence of chance is enough to rip God from his cosmic throne.  If chance existed, it would destroy God’s sovereignty.  If God is not sovereign, he is not God.  If he is not God, he simply is not.  PP






If chance is, God is not.  If God is, chance is not.  The two cannot coexist by reason of the impossibility of the contrary (the law of non-contradiction).’

Sproul’s whole book is obviously about chance, but let me give an example that hopefully will illustrate what he is saying.  Use the coin toss example.  Mathematicians can figure the odds of a coin turning up heads in a given number of tosses.  The simplest is one toss.  What are the odds there?  That’s right, 50-50.  How much influence does chance have on the result?  Absolutely nothing!  It is simply a term used to describe what may happen.  It certainly has no power to do anything. There is no possibility that chance can have any influence on that or anything else!  Yet evolutionists give chance great power by adding a simple word in front of it.  Can you guess what it is? PP

 “By”!  Suddenly chance takes on magical powers of creation! PP



Evolutionists posit that we can have effects without causes.  Uncaused effects represent a contradiction in terms, as by definition an effect is something produced by an antecedent cause.  No effect is ever quantitatively greater or qualitatively superior to its cause.  An effect can be lower than its cause but never higher.  Yet the theory of evolution attempts to make effects such as organized complexity, life, and personality greater than their causes, which are disorder, non-life, and impersonal forces.  That is an impossibility!

We’ve seen two references to logic, and specifically the law of non-contradiction.  Evolutionists and secular humanists continually violate the laws of logic, and sadly, for the most part they get away with it.  We should be alert to someone violating the laws of logic and challenge them when they do it.  To help you in this regard, I recommend PP  




Unshakeable Foundations by Norman Geisler and Peter Bocchino.  It’s first chapter is titled Questions About Logic.

Let’s return to the scientific laws of information.


5.  There can be no information without a code.  PP


6.  All codes result from an intentional choice and agreement between sender and recipient.  PP


7.  Allocating meaning to a set of symbols by a sender, and determining meaning from a set of symbols by a recipient, are mental processes requiring intelligence.  PP



8.  There can be no new information without an intelligent, purposeful sender.  PP


9.  Any given chain of information can be traced backward to an intelligent source.  PP


10.   Information comprises the nonmaterial foundation for all such as PP biological systems, technological systems and works of art.

Based on the scientific laws of information, we can make some logical deductions:  PP


 1) The laws of information refute the assumption of scientific materialism and the theories of chemical and biological evolution.  2)  They establish the existence of an eternal, all- knowing, all-powerful Creator who has described His acts of creation in Genesis.

We have discussed the first two of God’s three acts of creation.  The first occurred in Genesis 1:1 regarding the creation (bara) of the heavens and the earth.  The second act of creation by God was the creation of living creatures (bara and nephesh) in Genesis 1:21.  These creatures have a consciousness of the things around them and an ability to react to them.  God’s third and final act of creation is addressed in our next section, Genesis 1:26-31 PP: 


“Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’  And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him, male and female He created them.  PP


And God blessed them; and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.’  PP


Then God said, ‘Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food’; and it was so.  PP




And God saw all that He had made, and behold, it was very good.  And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day.”

In verse 26 we again see a reference to the Trinity  PP:


“Then God said, ‘Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness…”  Man was made in the same manner as the other animals, that is, from pre-existing matter, and he was nephesh as the animals, that is, living or with consciousness.  But there the similarity ends, for man was made in the image of God.  I don’t think anyone can fully grasp what that means, which is a good time to be reminded of Isaiah 55:8&9 PP:





“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, Neither are your ways My ways, declares the Lord.  For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts.” 

Although God does not have a physical body, we know from Scripture that PP






God can PP see (Gen 16:13),PP hear (Ps 94:9), PP smell (Gen 8:21), PP touch (Gen 32:32) and PP speak (2nd Pet. 1:18).  Also, whenever He has appeared to man He has done so in the form of a human body.

So, unlike all the other animals, man was created to be able to physically interact with God; an erect posture, upward gazing countenance, facial expressions varying with emotional feelings, and a brain and tongue designed for articulate symbolic speech.

The spirit of an animal ceases to exist when the body dies as Ecclesiastes 3:21 teaches.  PP


Spirit is the Hebrew word ruach, which is 3commonly translated “wind” or “breath.”  Both animals and man have a spirit, or living “essence.”  But only man is made in the image of God and has an eternal soul, capable of communion and fellowship with God.  Mentally only man has a moral consciousness, the ability to think abstractly, an understanding of beauty and emotion, and the capacity for worshiping and loving God. 

Relative to the science involved in the creation of man, we’ve already seen the evidence relative to the inability of evolution to evolve the complexity necessary for life at the animal and human level to exist.  It’s important that we remember the illogical position that the evolutionist takes, particularly as it relates to man.  Recall that they believe that as you sit there PP


you are the product of random, natural processes that did not have you in mind.  As part of that, they argue that your thoughts are simply the product of chemical reactions in your brain.  We have already seen that information is an intangible and also that the source of information can without exception be traced back to an intelligent source.  The evolution position regarding thought violates the laws of science. 


The creation story we see in these verses is certainly supportable from the evidence in biology we have seen and will see.  But there is something else of interest in the verses.  Verses 29 and 30 state PP:


“Then God said, ‘Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and to every thing that moves on the earth which has life, I have given every green plant for food’; and it was so.”

This clearly implies that the entire earth was covered with vegetation unlike today and that every living thing was vegetarian.  When, for example, you think of PP


Tyrannosaurus Rex with those big teeth, do you think of a vegetarian?  The reality is that the size of teeth have nothing to do with whether something is vegetarian or a meat eater, or both.   Genesis 9:2 states PP:

 “And the fear of you and the terror of you shall be on every beast of the earth and on every bird of the sky, with everything that creeps on the ground, and all the fish of the sea, into your hand they are given.”

That verse, which in context is immediately after Noah and his family exit the ark, clearly indicates that before that time man and the beasts of the earth lived in harmony and that therefore everything was in fact vegetarian.  Relative to T. Rex, what do you see in this depiction PP


that is unusual?  No one can be dogmatic about this, but I don’t think those wimpy arms would be helpful for a voracious meat-eater.

So man is not given the meat of animals to eat until after the Great Flood.  The following post-Flood verse in Genesis 9 states PP:   

“Every moving thing that is alive shall be food for you, I give all to you, as I gave the green plant.”  The latter part of that verse is clearly referring back to PP

Genesis 1:29-30 where all living things are only give plants to eat.  So after the Flood man’s menu is expanded to include all living things.  The beginning of the verse also expands on verse two.  Not only will the beasts fear man, but for the first time they will be hunted by man, making that fear justified.

The molecules to man creation story of Neo-Darwinism fails the evidence test.  That story states that natural selection acting on beneficial mutations over eons of time created the diversity of life on earth.  Yet irreducible complexity and information both contradict key parts of that story, as does the evidence regarding the age of the earth.  Let’s move to our next section to address another key aspect of Neo-Darwinism, beneficial mutations.  Without the engine of beneficial mutations, Neo-Darwinism collapses.

Before we begin the section on beneficial mutations, let’s go to the work of a group of evolutionary developmental biologists.  In PP


Origination of Organismal Form by Miller and Newman, which documents the findings of a group of biologists in Altenberg, Austria, we find the following bomb-shell of a statement in its first chapter.  This is a longer than normal quote, but the context of its final statement is important, so bear with it.  PP

 The neo-Darwinian paradigm still represents the central explanatory framework of evolution... This refined and canonical theory concerns the variational dynamics and adaptation of existing forms. It is a gene-centered, gradualistic, and externalistic theory, according to which all evolutionary modification is a result of external selection acting on incremental genetic variation. The resulting adaptations lead to successive replacement of phenotypes and hence to evolution.”



“Although this theory can account for the phenomena it concentrates on, namely, variation of traits in populations, it leaves aside a number of other aspects of evolution, such as the roles of developmental plasticity and epigenesis or of nonstandard mechanisms such as assimilation. Most important, it completely avoids the origination of phenotypic traits and of organismal form. In other words, neo-Darwinism has no theory of the generative.”

That is a damning statement coming from evolutionists!  PP




Neo-Darwinism has no theory of the generative!  In other words, Neo-Darwinism can explain change within a species, which we term micro-evolution and with which no one disagrees.  However, it cannot explain how one species supposedly begets another, which is known as macro-evolution and is a modern-day fairy tale for adults.  If it cannot how one species beget another species, which we have all been told decades that it does explain, then Neo-Darwinism is false.  Yet notice the homage that they give in the beginning PP



to a theory they then state has no engine to drive the train of evolution!  That shows the deference given in academia to the evolution dogma.  To see what happens to those that don’t show such deference I again refer you to PP


Expelled:  No Intelligence Allowed with Ben Stein.         

In February & March, 2008 I made presentations to the Florida Board of Education (FBOE) and the Florida Senate Subcommittee on Education against the new, evolution-as-dogma, Florida science standards.  Those standards, currently used by our public school system, now state in Standard 15:  Diversity and Evolution of Living Organisms – PP




“Evolution is the fundamental concept underlying all of biology and is supported by multiple forms of scientific evidence.”  There is a critical error in that standard.  The fundamental concepts underlying all of biology  would be cell theory and perhaps Mendel’s theory of genetics.  Cell theory basically states that life comes from life; that all living cells come from pre-existing living cells.  We’ll examine genetics in the next class.