Questions posed by the honorable Mr. Dyck: Explain 3 problems with a naturalistic explanation of life.
Answer: First problem that comes to mind is that something cannot come from nothing. For example, there has been numerous studies done on spontaneous generation which have claimed that it works. However, every time they get a "spontaneous generation" to occur it is usually machine induced therefore making it non-spontaneous. To put it in other words, it does not logically follow that if I were to place two hydrogen atoms in an empty room and leave for four hours that I would come back to find a single celled organism. It's simply not possible.
Second problem is that no mutation has proven benificial. Many scientists have experimented with mutation to the DNA, such as the four-winged-fruit-fly. However, the extra set of wings upon this fruit fly are not benificial. In fact the second set of wings are completely useless. There are no muscles attached to them and they therefore cannot move. The extra wings furthermore counterbalance the original, natural wings making sustained flight for the four-winged-fruit-fly impossibly difficult. Not exactly what I'd call a helpful mutation!
The third problem is that if evolution where true, and the earth took billions of years to evolve, where are all the fossils? The fossil record has no "intermediate species" (a.k.a. missing links) and it's been around for over 150 years. In fact Charles Darwin, the father of natural selection, even stated that if the fossil record did not support his theory then his theory would utterly collapse upon itself. That was 150 years ago, when the fossil record was no where near as extensive as it is today. However, after all these years we still don't have the supposed missing links. So either evolution did not occur and the universe was designed, or these missing links have no skeletons (which if we are supposed to have evolved from missing links then this would be a far fetched answer to the riddle).
