Скачать с ютуб The Simple Cell? - by Deryl R. Corbit в хорошем качестве

The Simple Cell? - by Deryl R. Corbit

This is a re-upload from 9 years ago, "The (not so) Simple Cell - based on an article by Cytologist Deryl R. Corbit" (now deleted). This reading is loosely adapted from an article published in the Adventist Review Nov. 20, 2003 by one who studies cells for a living - Cytologist Deryl R. Corbit. THE SIMPLE CELL? 1. In the late 1800s the term simple cell was coined by Ernst Haeckel (a German scientist and strong supporter of Charles Darwin). The theory of evolution led Haeckel to believe that the cell was "a simple little lump of albuminous combination of carbon". To Haeckel it seemed that such simple life, with no internal organs, could easily be produced from inanimate material. 2. However, in 1931 the invention of the TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPE began to reveal the internal structure of the human cell. And in 1942 the SCANNING ELECTRON MICROSCOPE was finalized, allowing researchers to view the outer form of the human cell. One could now magnify up to 1 million times, and learned minds were amazed as the complexity of the "simple cell" unravelled. 3. The late Carl Edward Sagan (1934 – 1996) was an American astronomer, cosmologist, astrophysicist, astrobiologist, author and science communicator in astronomy and other natural sciences. He was also an avowed atheist. Professor Sagan was awestruck as he studied the human cell. I quote "A living cell is a marvel of detailed and complex architecture. It is known that molecules are being synthesized at an enormous rate. Almost any enzyme catalyses the synthesis of more than 100 other molecules per second. The information content of a simple cell has been estimated as . . . comparable to about 100 million pages of the Encyclopaedia Britannica" (End Quote). 4. As I (a Christian layperson) ponder the arguments laid forth on the origin of life, only two possibilities are presented - creation or spontaneous generation. There is not a third way on the table. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago by Louis Pasteur, but that leads to only one other conclusion - supernatural creation. An Atheist could not accept that on philosophical grounds. Therefore the choice is made to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance. One has only to contemplate the magnitude of this task to surely concede that the spontaneous generation of a living organism is impossible. Yet here we are, as the result, many believe, of spontaneous generation. This belief in the impossible can be explained only by faith, not fact. The Bible defines faith in Hebrews Chapter 11: verse 1. It is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.” The theory of spontaneous generation (the very basis of the theory of evolution), falls naturally into the realm of philosophy and religion, but not of verifiable science. Creationists accept that God fashioned this marvellous mechanism, while evolutionists accept the theory of spontaneous generation - the natural synthesis of something from nothing. Francis Crick and James Watson won the Nobel Prize in 1962 for their discovery of DNA Deoxy-ribo-nucleic acid. In 1982 Francis Crick (an evolutionist), wrote a book entitled Life Itself, Its Origin and Nature. In his book Crick says: "An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that, in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going" (End Quote). 5. While many Evolutionists have waxed bold in stating that the “theory” of evolution is as good as proven fact, allow me to invite you to accept the firm conviction of the Shepherd-King David as found in Psalm 33:6-9 "By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth. For he spake, and it was done; he commanded, and it stood fast". In moments of truth, great minds seem to agree, evolution is only possible in discussions among like-minded, and the brightest among them stand in awe at the complexity of that so “simple” cell. 6. I am not a scientist and admit that in any debate I would soon stand in dumb ignorance at the arguments made by the learned. I did not arrive at my “here I stand” stance by intellectual brilliance. My faith was given me from above. I unashamedly place my faith in the GOD of creation, and word any defence by using the 66 books of the Protestant Bible. I hear the declarations of many educated persons, but I am not attracted to their theories, for in less than 100 years each intellectual giant is laid in the dust. Philosophically, Atheism offers me only an eternal, dark, cold, empty nothingness. I take courage in the words of One who said, “I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly” John 10:10. In my firm faith, I am left with only one conclusion, Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning, God”.