The origin of information -an impossible dilemma for atheists

There is a continuing debate among theoretical physicists about how the stuff (matter/energy) of the universe could have originated of its own accord, out of 'nothing' (the elusive, so-called ‘theory of everything’). However, the most important question in this debate: Where did information come from? Has been largely ignored, but this is absolutely CRUCIAL - because the universe, as we know it, could not exist without information. The laws of nature, are indicative of order, they govern and control the whole material universe, and extremely complex information is essential for all life.
Information is rightly called the third fundamental property of the universe.
So we have to wonder why the crucial question of the origin of information is excluded from the 'theory of everything' debate?

Isn't it ironic that atheists, rely almost entirely on non-physical means such as; mental processes, information and mathematical equations to formulate their so-called 'Theories' of 'Everything' which then completely exclude all non-physical entities?
They are 'Theories of Everything' that don't include an explanation of EVERYTHING, only physical entities. So they are NOT theories of everything at all, the whole description is a misnomer and completely misleading. It can only be construed as a device intended to deceive.

Without a credible explanation for the origin of information - any proposed theory of 'everything' would, in fact, be a theory of only some things, while excluding others ... and therefore absolutely useless.

Life requires information from the very outset, even the tiniest, most primitive cell is packed with complex information (coded in DNA), and the means of interpreting it.
Life could not exist without information. The first life on earth (regardless of how you believe it originated) needed complex information right from the very start, this is certain and beyond any dispute. The well established, law of biogenesis definitely rules out the idea that life can arise of its own accord from sterile matter, but atheists refuse to accept that law (which has never been refuted) and have perversely invented their own law of 'abiogenesis', which says the exact opposite.
However, even if we accept the ridiculous (unscientific) claim that the law of biogenesis is not valid, we are left with the major problem of how information arose in the alleged, first, living cell? Was the information for life just floating about in the ether waiting to alight on the right mixture of chemicals in some primordial soup? I think not! (but atheists have not yet been able to propose any better explanation).
Even if such an incredible thing were possible, the question would still remain as to how this information originated within the universe? Where did it come from, and why? Hence for any atheist (or evolutionist), the origin of DNA code itself, and the information it contains, is an impossible dilemma.
The unanswerable question for atheism is, which came first, information or matter?
Information cannot possibly create itself, but neither can matter. To suggest that either of them originated, of their own accord, from nothing, is self-evidently, utter nonsense and completely unscientific.
(Atheists will never be able to answer this question because the only logical option is - - a non-contingent first cause of all the material realm, which is eternally pre-existent, intelligent, non-material and therefore not subject to natural laws which govern all natural entities, i.e. a Supernatural Creator God).

Amazingly, we were told by ‘experts’ in 2004 that the discovery of the simple sugar glycoldehide in a gas cloud (known as Sagittarius B2 allegedly detected light years away in the middle of our galaxy) could explain the origin of DNA & life. (Daily Mirror newspaper, UK, 22/9/2004)
This is comparable to claiming that, if a component for making ink were to be discovered in outer space, it would explain how the complete works of Shakespeare could have originated spontaneously, of their own accord - and some people call that science - - incredible!

Make no mistake, atheism is just another religion.
Atheists are very fond of telling us what they don’t believe, but just what do they believe?

Because they reject an eternal, pre-existent, non-material first cause, every atheist is obliged to believe the preposterous notion that, the potential and information for life, as well as all the laws of nature, must have been an intrinsic property of the first matter/energy, when this matter/energy arose by its own power, and of its own volition, out of absolutely nothing, at the beginning of everything!!!! (albeit contrary to logic, common sense, and the laws of nature that govern all matter).
Surely this must be the ultimate miracle to outdo all other miracles.
Supporters of this bizarre, magical belief are very fond of describing atheism as “the only rational viewpoint,” - - -
They call such a belief rational? - - -
What do you think?

Atheists cannot accept that any information pre-existed the material. Therefore, matter not only had to create itself, but also its own governing laws & information, from nothing, and so the god of the atheist religion of naturalism is credited with even more creative powers than those usually attributed to an eternally pre-existing, Supernatural God.
In other words, ‘matter’ is automatically ascribed by atheist belief as a self-created, intelligent entity.
(This is completely contrary to logic, and to natural laws which describe the inherent properties and behaviour of matter and all natural occurrences, without exception).

“It’s just unbelievable what unbelievers are willing to believe, in order to be unbelievers” (Dr. Duane Gish)

Consider this ...
Long, long, long ago, in an eternal void of nothingness, a tiny cosmic egg arose of its own volition. Then, all of a sudden, the egg accidentally exploded and proceeded to expand until it became the whole universe and everything within it.
(This is the atheistic, ‘Big Bang’, fairy story of creation in a nutshell - - - or should that be eggshell?). But where could this cosmic egg have come from? - - - who knows? - - - perhaps a cosmic chicken laid it? - - - if so - - - where did the cosmic chicken come from? - - - don’t even ask! - - - because the only thing we are absolutely sure of is that we are still waiting for any ‘Big Bang’ supporter to propose a better solution. - - - Please don’t hold your breath!
The best they have come up with so far, is that the 'nothing' in which the cosmic egg emerged, wasn't really nothing, but 'something', i.e. SPACE. But, any fool can see that this is just a device to make a ridiculous belief sound plausible. It is obviously not plausible, because they then have to explain how space (which is not nothing, but just a part of the contingent, material realm) originated, which takes the whole ridiculous idea back to square one.

Since information is not a physical element (and as information is a fundamental constituent of the universe and an essential feature of all life) to assert that the universe is composed solely of matter and energy is clearly wrong.
The speculated ‘Big Bang’ explosion is an accidental, purposeless and destructive event, with no directing/organising, informational component whatsoever. As it is not possible for such a ‘Big Bang’ or any other undirected release of energy to create useful information (or any sort of order) it is patently obvious that this ‘Big Bang’ story of creation is erroneous.

Where has wisdom gone?
For all our modern knowledge and technology, ancient man had a wisdom in these matters which far surpasses modern ideas.
It is now more than 2 thousand years ago that Christ's Apostle John delivered the ultimate ‘theory of everything’. He understood (like many of his predecessors) that the most important factor in the question of origins is information: “In the beginning was the word” [(word: logos) = information]. John 1; 1. (the 'Word' is applied by John to Jesus Christ as true God and true man - meaning the universe was created by the Word (Jesus), by means of God's word - intelligent, constructive information).

All sensible people realise that information just had to come first, nothing constructive or creative can occur without information. Science tells us that, any input of raw energy alone, tends to increase entropy. Only organised or directed energy (energy with an informational component) can temporarily reverse or reduce the effects of entropy.
Without information, nothing material could exist in its present form.
Information derives only from an intelligent source, so only information from a pre-existing, supernatural, intelligent source could bring everything material into being, organise and control its construction and behaviour, and maintain its continued existence.
So the essential, single, first cause had to be both uncaused and intelligent.
There is no other logical option.

Belief in God did not just evolve (as some atheists keep telling us) as a means for ‘ignorant’, ‘primitive’, ‘superstitious’ humans to explain things they could not understand.
On the contrary, ancient man (from the time of Adam) fully understood (better than many of the so-called experts today) that the material universe does not contain within itself any possible means of creating itself and its essential, regulatory information, out of nothing.
A non-contingent, pre-existing, supernatural (non-material), eternal, infinite and omnipotent force had to be responsible for creating it. An essential element of that force is a supreme intelligence which has to be the original source of all information.

“ALL THINGS WERE MADE BY HIM; AND WITHOUT HIM WAS NOT ANY THING MADE THAT WAS MADE. IN HIM WAS LIFE
AND THE LIFE WAS THE LIGHT OF MEN” John 1: 3-4.

In this computer age, people are again beginning to understand the particular relevance of information.
A computer (the hardware) processes and stores information (the software). Without any software programming, the hardware would be useless.
As Chuck Missler points out in his book ‘Cosmic Codes; “software has no mass. (its embodiment may have weight, but the software doesn’t. It simply codes information)”.
A computer disk loaded with a million bytes of software will weigh no more than a blank disk and the information it contains can be sent invisibly through the airwaves from one point to another.
To quote Chuck Missler again “if you and I were meeting face-to-face, I would still not be able to see the real you. I would only see the temporary residence you are occupying. The real you, your personality - - call it soul, spirit, whatever - - is not visible. It is software not hardware. The codes - - your history, your accumulated responses to the events of your life, your attitudes - - are all simply informational, not physical. It is software only and software has no mass”. According to Einstein, time is a physical property - - - “that which has no mass has no time. You are eternal, that is what the Bible has declared all along. You are eternal whether you like it or not” Chuck Missler, Cosmic Codes. 1999. Koinonia house.

The information for life ....
Atheists and evolutionists have no idea how the first, genetic information originated. They claim the spontaneous generation of life (abiogenesis) is an established scientific fact, but this is completely disingenuous. Apart from the fact that abiogenesis violates the Law of Biogenesis, the Law of Cause and Effect and the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it also violates Information Theory.

Atheists and evolutionists have an enormous problem with explaining how the DNA code originated. However that is not the major problem. The impression is given to the public, that evolutionists only have to find an explanation for the origin of DNA by natural processes - and the problem of the origin of genetic information will have been solved. That is a confusion in the minds of many people that evolutionists cynically exploit. It is far from the truth, as they very well know.
Explaining how DNA was formed by chemical processes, explains only how the information, storage medium was formed (the hardware), it tells us nothing about the origin of the information (the software) it expresses.

To clarify this it helps to compare DNA to other information, storage mediums.
For example, if we compare DNA to the written word, we understand that the alphabet is a tangible medium for storing, recording and expressing information, it is not information in itself. The information is recorded in the sequence of letters, forming meaningful words.
You could say that the alphabet is the 'hardware' created from paper and ink, and the sequential arrangement of the letters is the software. The software is a mental construct, not a physical one.
The same applies to DNA.
DNA is not information in itself. Just like the alphabet, it is the medium for storing and expressing information. It is an amazingly efficient, storage medium. However, it is the sequence or arrangement of the amino acids which is the actual information, not the DNA code.
So, if evolutionists are ever able to explain how DNA was formed by chemical processes, it would explain only how the information storage medium was formed. It will tell us nothing about the origin of the information it carries. Therefore, when atheists and evolutionists tell us it is only a matter of time before 'science' will be able to fill the 'gaps' in our knowledge and explain the origin of genetic information, they are not being honest. Explaining the origin of the 'hardware' by natural processes is an entirely different matter to explaining the origin of the software.
Next time you hear atheists skating over the problem of the origin of genetic information with their usual bluff and bluster, and parroting their usual nonsense about science being able to fill such gaps in knowledge in the future, don't be fooled. They cannot explain the origin of genetic information, and never will be able to. The software cannot be created by chemical processes or the interaction of energy and matter, it is not possible. If you don't believe that. then by all means put it to the test, by challenging any atheist or evolutionist to explain how genetic information (not DNA) can originate by natural means?

ATHEISTS SHOOT THEMSELVES IN THE FOOT ....
It is a major problem for atheists to explain where natural laws came from, or why they exist?
In a PURPOSELESS universe there should be no regulatory principles at all.

Firstly, we would not expect anything to exist, we would expect eternal nothingness.

Secondly, even if we overlook that impossible hurdle, and assume by some amazing fluke and contrary to logic, something was able to create itself from nothing ….. we would expect that the ‘something’ would have no ordered structure and no laws based on that ordered structure. We would expect it to behave randomly and chaotically.

This is an absolutely fundamental question to which atheists have no answer. The basic properties of matter/energy, and the universe, scream …. ‘purpose’.
Atheists say the exact opposite.

If we consider the atheist belief; that matter is naturally predisposed to produce life and the genetic information for life, whenever environmental conditions are conducive (the atheist's so-called law of abiogenesis), the question arises of where does that predisposition for life come from, and why does such a property exist in a purposeless universe?

The idea that the origin of life is just an inevitable consequence of the right conditions – the right chemistry or interaction of matter and energy - is routinely presented by atheists and evolutionists as a scientific fact. They believe that is how life on Earth originated - and also that life is likely to exist elsewhere in the universe, for the very same reason.

For this to be true, matter/energy would have to be inherently predisposed for the potential production of life, whenever conditions are conducive and - therefore, some sort of natural law/plan/blueprint for the creation of life would have to be an intrinsic property of matter. A basic principle of science (and common sense) is that an effect can never be greater than that which causes it. In this case the effect - LIFE - could not be greater than that which atheists allege caused it, i.e. the random interaction of matter and raw energy and chemical processes. So there has to be a directive principle existing as an intrinsic property of matter that endows it with the ability to create life.

So atheists are left with an impossible dilemma – if life originates as a natural result of the inherent properties of matter, i.e. a natural predisposition for life, they have to explain where that predisposition for life comes from?

It would not be possible for matter to have such a property in a purposeless universe. Therefore, the atheist belief in a natural origin of life, denotes purpose in the universe which atheists deny. This then, is a classic catch 22 situation for atheists.

Atheists cannot have it both ways, if there is no purpose in the universe, matter cannot possibly have an inherent predisposition to produce life.

Thus the atheist belief in ‘no purpose’ also means there is no possibility of a natural origin of life.

The denial of purpose negates a natural origin of life.

So if atheists insist on claiming a natural origin of life, they are also obliged to admit to the existence of 'purpose' in the universe.

Therefore, either the idea of a purposeless universe is effectively debunked, or the idea of a natural origin of life is debunked - which is it?

Atheists can take their choice?
Either way, atheism is effectively debunked.
To believe in abiogenesis means that atheism is wrong.
To not believe in abiogenesis also means atheism is wrong.
Conclusion: atheism is wrong - period.

____________________________________________
"I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism"
"If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God"
Lord William Kelvin.
Noted for his theoretical work on thermodynamics, the concept of absolute zero and the Kelvin temperature scale.

The Law of Cause and Effect is a fundamental principle of the scientific method. Science literally means 'knowledge'. Knowledge about the natural world is gained through seeking adequate causes for every natural occurrence. An uncaused, natural ocurrence, is a completely, unscientific notion.
Concerning the Law of Cause and Effect, one of the world's greatest scientists, Dr. Albert Einstein wrote: “All natural science is based on the hypothesis of the complete causal connection of all events”
Albert Einstein. The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Hebrew University and Princeton University Press p.183

FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE
The Law of Cause and Effect. Dominant Principle of Classical Physics. David L. Bergman and Glen C. Collins
www.thewarfareismental.net/b/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/b...

"The Big Bang's Failed Predictions and Failures to Predict: (Updated Aug 3, 2017.) As documented below, trust in the big bang's predictive ability has been misplaced when compared to the actual astronomical observations that were made, in large part, in hopes of affirming the theory."
kgov.com/big-bang-predictions

Why God must exist.
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15818838060

Taken on: April 19, 2015

Tags:

Brian Greene

science matters

Darwinism has failed

truth in science

camp quest

charles darwin

creation science

genome

the selfish gene

genetic copying mistakes

spontaneous generation

atheist religion

new atheism

atheistic

atheist naturalism

religion of naturalism

natural laws

second law of thermodynamics

law of cause and effect

information theory

Professor Alice Roberts

Dr brian Cox

richard dawkins

Westminster skeptics

skeptics

British Humanist Association

secular humanism

humanist manifesto

Humanist

secular europe

the Dawkins Delusion

Dawkinsian

Christopher Hitchens

Sam Harris

Guy Berthault

creationist

creationism

secular society

secularist association

atheist bus campaign

atheism and paganism

science versus atheism

nazism

hitler

ernst Haeckel

piltdown man

Stalin

Mao

A C Grayling

talkorigins

Peter Tatchell

Stephen Fry

nicholas stenon

the blind watchmaker

M theory

theory of everything

the universe from nothing

origin of the universe

einstein

theism

darwinian decline in scientific integrity

scientific principles

scientism

pagan naturalism

Kate Smurthwaite

peter singer

andrew copson

North East Humanists

London School of Economics

LSE Space for Thought

atheist alliance international

skeptic magazine

Richard Dawkins Foundation for reason and science

freedom from religion foundation « less

Sets appears in: • Atheist myths debunked • The evolution scam more » • Atheism - the religion of naturalism. « less

Groups appears in: • Atheism • !FlickrSoup for Soul more » • #flickr • !Social Issues • *Really Unlimited* • ANYTHING & EVERYTHING PHOTOGRAPHIC / NO SL/AI • Darwinism • * OUR WONDERFUL WORLD * • ! ART & PHOTOGRAPHY ! All artistic works welcome • "I AM TELLING YOU A STORY HERE. CAN YOU SEE IT?" • "Smörgåsbord" (Unlimited Posting - Award 3) • "Unlimited Photos: No Rules" (NO AI, CGI or SL images) • (No limits) • Religions - freedom of religion • "THE WORLD IN FLICKR" (NEW RULES) • ! ♡ Flickrian ♡ No Rules:) Feel Free to invite your Friends! • ! Flickr Cafe ! • ! F l i c k r | S t y l e ! • ! Flickr Lover ! • ! The Flickr ! • ***Flickr Global • "NO RULES" Group...All kind of Great Shots are invited... • !Excellent Photos • Bible Belt: Unbuckled • * Everybodys Photo Group *(All Welcome) • ***Flickr-New Hope Group • !*ALL ARE WELCOME*! • !*Flickr All Stars*! • * just photos * no rules please use comment code appreciated • DARWINISM HAS FAILED « less

Stats: 20,945 views / 13 comments

go back

Link to this photo view:
Link to this photo large view: