Other

---

The main problem with evolution is the reality of complexity; to define complexity, mathematically, you would need to understand that things can't move without energy. When an object is moving, because of certain laws like inertia, that object will always move in a straight line. So to deal with energy, it needs to be bounced off a surface pattern. A surface pattern would defined the angle of the bounce and could change the speed of the object. To calculate complexity you would need two values one for speed and another for the direction. You would not need to define the object itself because you are thinking on the basic level of matter. We have to use a theoretical object because if we used an atom we would need a separate value for each electron or proton and neutron, and everything contained in those objects. You would define complexity by finding the result of an interaction between a pattern one and a second. As these objects interact at certain angles they may change each other's speed or they may change each other's direction, most likely both. (If the objects are moving in opposing directions speed may decrease or only direction may change. If both objects are moving in similar directions speed may increase or direction may change.) The level of complexity would be defined as the level of change in each object. Now what would be the interaction of these objects on a third object or the third object on these two. Now multiply the complexity level by a number greater than a trillion; and you will have a vague understanding of the complexity value of a one-celled organism... I have been told that this argument is too simplistic and it ignores things like gravity and other concepts that may interact it with objects, but that is not the case I am arguing a basic principle which means that my argument can only be false if you can show a principle that is not based on my argument. Ignoring which direction gravity is moving in, gravity can't pull with anymore energy than it has, therefore gravity can't make itself more complex so it does not break my argument.
Complexity cannot grow because numbers do not grow, a pattern of 10 has two options give up its 10 speed and energy points to one object or give 1 point to ten objects (and everything in between). The overall impact of a pattern can never be greater than its impact ability which is defined by its energy and direction. There is no magic speed or miraculous angle that once reached allows evolution of the pattern into a more complex pattern system, basic mathematics prevents evolution, because the human brain is more complex than a one-celled organism. The multiplication of cells does not counter my argument, it is mathematically acceptable to channel energy you already have and repeat yourself, it is easy to flow energy through a pattern that already exists, like using a stencil as a guide while drawing a picture. All the cell has to do is focus its energy on maintaining its pattern sequence then it slowly allows external energy to channel inward. The energy will follow the path of the cell's pattern sequence just like a river flowing down a mountain. Once the energy matches the cell it can split to its heart's content. Cellular reproduction is not technically energy increase or complexity increase because the cell uses its own patterns to channel energy. The energy slowly builds up and causes the cell to expand but only along the pattern's path. As the cell starts to double in size it starts to split because no object can counter its own energy level, so the cell simply can't hold itself together, this is simply an analog reaction. This means cells can only reproduce because they use their own bodies as stencils or patterns. So if a cell tried to change the most minute detail a massive amount of energy would be lost. Cells like stem cells don't evolve they simply repeat their patterns or downgrade into a less complex cell.
There is a major gap between DNA and the creation of a living creature, more complex than yourself. Imagine randomly creating a blueprint to a skyscraper. Now where is the skyscraper, in your imagination right? If a monkey has a blueprint to a skyscraper does the monkey have a skyscraper? It has been 150 years since evolution's lie and the blasphemers still have not explained the major gab between monkey with good DNA and a human. (A scientist can't respond to this because they don't know why DNA works. The audacity to build a theory on DNA without really knowing much about it.) It is true that scientists can genetically engineer smaller creatures but that is no difference from me cutting and pasting in an OpenOffice writer document. The truth is scientists don't know how the computer program works, better yet, they don't know how the operating system works. Better yet how the computer works. They are incredibly far away from God's magnitude. The cure to AIDS which was possibly caused during the testing of the polio vaccine in Uganda is far more important research. Evolution is a pointless science whose only purpose is an attack on God's truth. Evolutionists need to get real jobs. (Also, viruses don't evolve into more complex organisms they just change “equally” to a different organism.)

Back to patterns and energy.

Because energy flows in a straight line, light has to be converted into complex energy. To convert pure energy into complex you need to bounce the energy off a surface. That is the only way to get energy to move in a complex pattern, as in putting a dam on a river. To utilize water as complex energy you need to channel it through the patterns of the turbines in a dam. Energy can only be utilized if it can bounce off a surface. This means you can't utilize energy without a pattern for energy to be channeled through. A physical pattern not a digital pattern as with DNA. This law of complexity prevents you from utilizing a pattern you do not already have. A mother can only give birth to a child if she is a mother. You can't eat food without a fully operating digestive system, but you need food to create a digestive system. Evolution is inherently impossible, no energy system will every create an energy system that is more complex than itself. The energy system of an ancient monkey can't create a human brain.
This also means that the world will never be taken over by super smart robots because no scientist can create a robot more complex than himself, pattern-wise. Knowledge is an energy source, when you learn something you are simply absorbing an external pattern, then you create something based on the pattern you just learned. Everything is a pattern, one could refer to God as the most complex system. Mathematics states that for the human brain to exist, the universe or the one who created it must be a more complex numerical pattern. This system would then be smarter than us. And Gods existence would then be proven! The demise of religion has been greatly over exaggerated.

---

PLEASE ENCOURAGE AUTHOR BELOW LEAVE COMMENT ON ARTICLE