View source for SIMPLE-TO-COMPLEX ..............................50

'''Back to [[Subject Contents]]'''
----
'''Evolution Says .....'''

''Evolution is the long term development of simple organisms into complex organisms over ½ billion years. The fossil record proves this.'' 

'''The Facts Are .....'''

'''(1)''' Rather than regarding the single-celled bacteria as simple and primitive, many scientists today regard them as being complex and sophisticated. This becomes obvious, when it is considered that a one-celled animal may be made up of millions of molecular parts. ''Scientific American, Vol. 258, No. 6, June 1988 p:82''

'''(2)''' "The simplest bacterium is so complicated from the point of view of a chemist that it is almost impossible to imagine how it happened". ''Expressed by the chairman of a 1990 National Academy of Science committee reviewing all origin-of-life research, and recorded in John Horgan's "Trends in Evolution: In the Beginning .....", Scientific American, February, 1991 p:100-109''

'''(3)''' "But let us have no illusions. If today we look into the situations where the analogy with the life sciences is the most striking ..... our research would still leave us quite unable to grasp the extreme complexity of the simplest of organisms." ''Written by Ilya Prigogine (Professor & Director of the Physics Department, Universite Libre de Bruxelles) in the article "Can Thermodynamics Explain Biological Order?", in Impact of Science on Society, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1973 p:178''

'''(4)''' "I would rather believe in fairies than in such wild speculation. I have said for years that speculations about the origin of life lead to no useful purpose as even the simplest living system is far too complex to be understood in terms of the extremely primitive chemistry scientists have used in their attempts to explain the unexplainable." ''Thoughts expressed by Ernst B. Chain, Nobel Prize winning biochemist, and member of the penicillin development team. Quoted by Ronald W. Clark in his book "The Life of Ernst Chain: Penicillin and Beyond", Weidenfeld & Nicolson: London, 1985 p:147-148''

'''(5)''' "However, the macromolecule-to-cell transition is a jump of fantastic dimensions, which lies beyond the range of testable hypothesis. In this area, all is conjecture. The available facts do not provide a basis for postulating that cells arose on this planet ..... We simply wish to point out the fact that there is no scientific evidence." ''Written by the biochemists and evolutionists, David Green (University of Wisconsin, USA) and Robert Goldberger (National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland USA) in their book "Molecular Insights Into The Living Process", Academic Press: New York, 1967 p:406-407''

'''(6)''' "The problem for biology is to reach a simple beginning ..... the tendency is to imagine that there must have been a time when simple cells existed, but when complex cells did not ..... this belief has turned out to be wrong ..... Going back in time to the age of the oldest rocks ..... fossil residues of ancient life-forms in the rocks do not reveal a simple beginning. Although we may care to think of fossil bacteria and fossil algae and microfungi as being simple compared to a dog or horse, the information standard remains enormously high. Most of the biochemical complexity of life was present already at the time the oldest surface rocks of the Earth were formed." ''A statement indicating that all cellular organisms discovered as fossils so far have been made of complex cells - no evolution from primordial soup to simple cell to complex cell has yet been discovered. Written by evolutionists Fred Hoyle, and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, in "Evolution from Space", J.M. Dent & Sons: London, 1981 p:8 & 70''

'''(7)''' If anything should give an indication that evolution results in simple life becoming more complex, it should be shown in the amount of genetic material a species cell contains. The more complex an animal, the greater the number of  genes required for it to function. The converse should also be true. An examination, however, of the chromosome number of  living things shows that this is not the case. For example, the number of  chromosomes for some animals in order of their supposed evolutionary development are:- worm (2), crayfish (100), shrimp (254), goldfish (94), housefly (12), chicken (78),  mouse (40), horse (66), & human (46). ''E. Sinnott, et al, "Principles of Genetics" (5th ed.), McGraw-Hill: New York, 1958 p:11''