Astrophysicist Fred Hoyle placed the odds of unguided abiogenesis at 10^40000 to 1. (That's 40,000 zeros.)
This means it is an exponentially greater act of faith to reject a creator than to believe in one.
I think he underestimated the odds. They are much greater than even that. There is much proof against it and the odds are impossible. That is why no serious scientist can even propose a materialistic theory of abiogenesis that fits the known scientific facts. First proof of all is Pasteur's that life does not come from inert matter (and this was of course at one time the prediction of materialists). Then came the discovery of DNA and the chemical basis of organisms. This poses a totally insurmountable problem to abiogenesis. The smallest living cells has a DNA string of some one million base pairs long and some 600 genes, even cutting this number by a quarter as the smallest possible living cell would give us a string of some 250,000 base pairs of DNA. It is important to note here that DNA can be arranged in any of the four basic codes equally well, there is no chemical or other necessity to the sequence. The chances of such an arrangement arising are therefore 4^250,000. Now the number of atoms in the universe is said to be about 4^250. I would therefore call 4^250,000 an almost infinitely impossible chance (note that the supposition advanced that perhaps it was RNA that produced the first life has this same problem).
The problem though is even worse than that. Not only do you need two (2) strings of DNA perfectly matched to have life, but you also need a cell so that the DNA code can get the material to sustain that life. It is therefore a chicken and egg problem, you cannot have life without DNA (or RNA if one wants to be generous) but one also has to have the cell itself to provide the nutrients for the sustenance of the first life. Add to this problem that for the first life to have been the progenitor of all life on earth, it necessarily needs to have been pretty much the same as all life now on earth is, otherwise it could not have been the source of the life we know. Given all these considerations, yes, abiogenesis is impossible.
Astrophysicist Fred Hoyle placed the odds of unguided abiogenesis at 10^40000 to 1. (That's 40,000 zeros.)
This means it is an exponentially greater act of faith to reject a creator than to believe in one.
To both you and I, Creationism is the only logical and obvious explaination for life -- when the heart hardens, nothing appears obvious...
Hey -- I tacked on a few extra zeros at the end, then I got too tired :-)
The evolutionist realizes his only chance at discrediting God's Creationism is by "proving" evolutionism. Ain't never happenin'.
Astrophysicist Fred Hoyle placed the odds of unguided abiogenesis at 10^40000 to 1. (That's 40,000 zeros.)
This short script provides a better picture of the odds:
#!/usr/bin/perlThe output is here.
print "1 in 10";
for ($i=1; $i < 40000; $i++) {
print "0";
}