Random Designer II

I’m continuing to blog through this interesting book by Dr. Richard Colling, and I’m enjoying it a great deal. I want to note that this isn’t a review; rather, it’s simply journaling the experience of reading the book. I’m doing this because this book appears to me to be a powerful experience in itself. It’s not about being a microbiologist, accepting evolution, and incidentally being a believer. It is clear throughout that Dr. Colling takes his faith seriously.

In fact, I get a bit of a feeling of retelling Genesis. That may sound odd to many readers, so let me digress. There are many positions on how to interpret Genesis, from taking it as narrative history, which results in the young earth creationist position, to a symbolic interpretation, such as taking each day as a long period of time, but trying to fit the days into the scientific facts. My own position is that Genesis expresses God’s message of involvement in the creation in the context of that era’s cosmology. God is not trying to convey cosmology; the writer provides the cosmology from what he knows. God’s message would come through clearly to those who accept that cosmology.

Modern Christians interpreters can be compared, I believe, to someone who receives a letter and gets all his information out of the envelope and the paper, missing the actual message. Now please be aware that this is my position. I do not know what Dr. Colling’s position is on Genesis. Perhaps he expands on that in later chapters, but I’m blogging as I read. In today’s reading I got the distinct sense of a writer perceiving God’s presence everywhere, and conveying that in modern terms. You can take that for what it’s worth, but that’s my impression thus far.

At the end of my previous blog on this topic, I mentioned that chapter 3 (I accidentally said chapter 2) discusses the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and describes this not as a problem for evolution, and it is sometimes presented by creationists, but rather as the driver (that’s the title of the chapter).

I vaguely recall when I first encountered this issue, and someone explained how evolution could not possibly work, because everything tends towards maximum disorder, and evolution has it going the other way. My own thought was, “and yet here we are,” since living creatures, when they’re growing, certainly do appear to go the other way. Later I read some explanations that clarified things for me quite a bit.

In chapter 3, Dr. Colling discusses the second law in layman’s terms. The explanation is the simplest and most straightforward that I’ve ever read, and yet I don’t see any omissions of things that should be expected at this level. I’m sure this isn’t ready for a physics text, but it works for this Bible teacher! He continues (p. 27) with constructive synthesis reactions and their required input–energy, and finally describes these reactions as creative.

That really doesn’t do justice to the chapter, but I don’t think I am capable of boiling it down and still getting in the essentials. The next chapter is titled “Upon this foundation” and subtitled “The Universe is Born.” Together those pretty much tell the tale. This chapter goes from the big bang approximately through the formation of the earth, looking at how the various elements are formed and why.

I’m going to conclude by discussing chapter 5, in which we find a discussion of the ins and outs of the formation of life (abiogenesis, though Dr. Colling doesn’t use the term). This is the first time I’ve found a good introduction for the layman to this complex topic. Normally folks distinguish abiogenesis from biological evolution, and well the should. Biological evolution, starting with the presence of at least a living cell is much better understood, and one can assume the miraculous appearance of the first life, and yet accept the theory of evolution.

Dr. Colling details the major elements that have been studied, those cases in which we have possible pathways, and being very clear that this is not a field in which anyone has solid answers, or is likely to have any soon. Yet there is a good deal of material available that suggests that natural processes may be found given time. I like the enumeration of the pieces we need, those we have, and those we need, along with the caution that just because we have a possible pathway to the formation of certain molecules doesn’t mean that’s the only one, or the one that actually occurred.

This is a chapter that those who have problems delineating the boundaries of science. Many criticisms of evolutionary theory simply involve pointing out stuff we don’t know yet. But “stuff we don’t know” is the sort of stuff that excites real scientists, and sets them off on the path of discovery. I would say that a good way to distinguish a scientific attitude is by one’s reaction to the unknown. The person who views the absence of knowledge as a stop sign does not have the attitude of a scientist.

On that note, let me use a brief quote. After describing some of the complexity of biomolecules, Dr. Colling says (p. 39):

But obstacles like these do not discourage scientists. They have a profound belief, based upon experience, that the physical world will ultimately make sense. Therefore, just as a skilled detective pieces together the various elements of a crime scene to recreate past events, modern scientists are using he growing wealth of scientific information to knit together a relatively coherent picture of how life on earth developed.

Now that’s a scientific attitude. In addition, creationist criticisms of evolutionary theory are often based on the expectation that an answer will answer everything at once. Perhaps this expectation is based on the overwhelming breadth of “In the beginning God …” But in studying complex topics scientists often have to spend years studying minute portions of the puzzle, knowing that a broader answer will only result after their work has been combined with that of others.

For example, back in chapter 4, Dr. Colling cites the work of Stanley Miller. I have heard this experiment criticized over and over because, as some folks say, he did all that work and he still couldn’t create life. This assumes, of course, that he was trying to create life. Perhaps we’re also inclined to this kind of expectation by the movies. The hacker sits down at a computer keyboard, and in 30 seconds has hacked his way into a major government installation. The scientist clones a human in his basement, solving the question of cloning in one big package. But in fact each of these processes involves many complex steps. Miller provided one pathway. As I understand Dr. Colling’s summary, it’s not likely to be the right one, but he still provided the knowledge that there were conditions under which such complex molecules could form.

I’ve read a couple more chapters, but my normal tendency to be long winded is getting ahead of me, and I should probably not make this any longer. I’ll be continuing with chapter 6, “Magnificent Molecular Micro-Machines.”