Featured post

Index

View my Flipboard Magazine. Read books Online here, or Download  as <PDF> or   < Word > UNIVERSE SCIENCE, GOD : ...

Showing posts with label Evolution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Evolution. Show all posts

Chapter-5: Theory of Evolution

The science has formulated a ‘Theory of Evolution’ to explain the creation of human being. Word ‘Theory’ means; something taken as true without proof for the sake of argument or investigation, its opposite is ‘fact’; a thing known for certain to have occurred or to be true; a datum of experience. Evolution is a gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form. 
The idea of human evolution was first presented by the Muslim thinkers; Al Jahiz (776-868 C.E) and Ibn Miskawayh (930-1030 C.E) also mentioned by the great Sufi mystic and poet Maulana Jalal-ad-Din ar-Rumi (1207-1273 C.E): “Low in the earth, I lived in realms of sore and stone; And then I smiled in many tinted flowerers; Then roving with the wild and wandering hours, O’er earth and air and ocean’s zone, In a new birth, I dived and flew, And crept and ran, And all the secret of my essence drew Within a form that brought them all to view- And lo, a Man! And then my goal, Beyond the clouds, beyond the sky, In realms where non may change or die- In general form; and then away Beyond the bounds of night and day, And Life and Death, unseen or seen, Where all that is hath ever been, As One and Whole.”[Translation, quoted from “Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam”by Muhammad Iqbal, the great poet philosopher of 20th century]. 
The British naturalist Charles Darwin (1809-1882 C.E) further developed the theory of biological evolution, stating that all species of organisms arise and develop through the natural selection of small, inherited variations that increase the individual’s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce. Accordingly it is hypothesize that: ‘An evolutionary divergence exist between the lineages of humans and the great apes (Pongidae) on the African continent 5–8 million years ago. Homo habilis inhabited sub-Saharan Africa until 1.5 million years ago. Homo habilis, in turn, appears to have been supplanted by a taller and more humanlike species, Homo erectus. This species lived from 2,000,000 to 250,000 years ago and gradually migrated into Asia and parts of Europe. Archaic forms of Homo sapiens with features resembling those of both Homo erectus and modern humans appeared 400,000 years ago in Africa and perhaps parts of Asia, but fully modern humans emerged only 250,000–150,000 years ago, probably having descended from Homo  erectus.’

Origin of Life:

If a (human) species can develop only from a preexisting species (apes), through the process of evolution, then how did life originate? Among the many philosophical and religious ideas advanced to answer this question, one of the most popular was the theory of Spontaneous Generation, according to which,  living organisms could originate from nonliving matter spontaneously. Research by Tyndall, together with findings of Pasteur (1822-1895), put an end to the doctrine of spontaneous generation. Biopoiesis is an other process by which living organisms are ‘thought’ to develop from nonliving matter. According to this theory, conditions were such that, at one time in Earth’s history, life was created from nonliving material, probably in the sea, which contained the necessary chemicals. During this process, molecules slowly grouped, then regrouped, forming ever more efficient means for energy transformation and becoming capable of reproduction. Thus the evolutionary theory claims that life started with the formation of the first living cell by chance. The claim that nonliving materials can come together to form life is an unscientific one, that has not been verified by any experiment or observation. Life is only generated from life. Each living cell is formed by the replication of another cell.
In the 1920s a Soviet biochemist, A.I. Oparin, suggested the concept of “Chemical Evolution.” He and other scientists suggested that life may have come from nonliving matter under conditions that existed on the primitive Earth, when the atmosphere consisted of the gases methane, ammonia, water vapour, and hydrogen. According to this concept, energy supplied by electrical storms and ultraviolet light may have broken down the atmospheric gases into their constituent elements, and organic molecules may have been formed when the elements recombined. Despite all his theoretical studies, Oparin was unable to produce any results to shed light on the origin of life. He says in his book The Origin of Life, published in 1936: ‘Unfortunately, however, the problem of the origin of the cell is perhaps the most obscure point in the whole study of the evolution of organisms.’ Professor Klaus Dose, the president of the Institute of Biochemistry at the University of Johannes Gutenberg, states: ‘More than 30 years of experimentation on the origin of life in the fields of chemical and molecular evolution have led to a better perception of the immensity of the problem of the origin of life on earth rather than to its solution. At present all discussions on principal theories and experiments in the field either end in stalemate or in a confession of ignorance.
Instead of accepting the reality, some scientists came up with the flimsy argument that under present biospheric conditions new forms of life are not likely to be created from nonliving matter. Others feel that life is continuously being created but that the new forms are not so well adapted to the environment as existing ones and are thus unable to compete successfully. Such illogical conclusion has been made-up; despite all the power of the human intellect, knowledge and technology, no one in the world has ever succeeded in forming a living cell by bringing inanimate materials together, not even in the most advanced laboratories. Thus this claim is contrary to the most basic principles of science, hence self contradictory. There is general consensus among the biologists that it may never be possible to determine experimentally how life originated or whether it originated only once or more than once.
Some scientists, on the basis of the ubiquitous genetic code found in all living organisms on Earth, presumed that life appeared only once and that all the diverse forms of plants and animals evolved from this primitive creation. However the genetic code, once thought to be identical in all forms of life, has been found to diverge in certain organisms and in the mitochondria of some eukaryotes (a single-celled or multicellular organism whose cells contain a distinct membrane-bound nucleus). The similar organs or similar genes among different species resemble each other, not because they have evolved by chance from a common ancestor, but because they have been designed deliberately to perform a particular function. Modern scientific discoveries show that the claim that similarities in living things are due to descent from a “common ancestor” is not valid, and that the only rational explanation for such similarities is “common design.”
In the 1990s, research into the genetic codes of living things worsened the quandary faced by the theory of evolution in this regard. In these experiments, instead of the earlier comparisons that were limited to protein sequences, “ribosomal RNA” (rRNA) sequences were compared. From these findings, evolutionist scientists sought to establish an “evolutionary tree.” However, they were disappointed by the results. All this leads to just one conclusion: Like all living things, plants were also created. From the moment they first emerged, all their mechanisms have existed in a finished and complete form. Terms such as ‘development over time,” “changes dependent on coincidences,” and “adaptations which emerged as a result of need,” which one finds in the evolutionist literature, have no truth in them at all and are scientifically meaningless. The thorough examination of the scientific evidence for the origin of life, and what emerges clearly demonstrates that life was not the result of chance, as claimed by Darwinism and materialist philosophy in general. Living species could not have evolved from one another through a string of coincidences. On the contrary, all living things were independently and flawlessly created. As the twenty-first century dawns, science offers but one answer to the question of the origin of life: Creation. The important thing is that science has confirmed the truth which religion has been witness to from the dawn of history to the present day.
According to the theory of Evolution in nutshell: Some thing came from sea, gradually through evolution it developed in to a creature, then small monkey, bigger monkey, chimpanzee and then human. This raises many questions; Who created monkeys through some creature from the sea? If some thing from sea became monkey why it could not directly become human being? If monkey became human then why there are still so many monkeys? Apart from fiction movies, are there still some monkeys (part human-part monkey) in the process of becoming human? If not, why? Is there some more advanced form of human? If not; Why the evolution process has stopped? Can the theory of evolution be reversed (retrogression), human to monkey? These questions are partially answered by evolutionist, through unscientific conjecture. God created the universe and all the living things in it from nothing. And it was God who created the first human (Adam) from clay and spirit and blessed him with countless characteristics, including the most important; knowledge & intellect. The later humanity is created out of the first couple. This truth has been sent down to man since the dawn of time by prophets, and revealed in holy books. Every prophet has told the communities he addressed that God created man and all living things. The Bible and the Qur’an all tell of the news of creation in the same way. Harun Yahya, the renowned Turkish scholar, in his famous books: ‘The Evolution Deceit’ & ‘Darwinism Refuted’; has systematically analyzed the Theory of Evolution in the light of modern science, citing all the authentic references.

Refutation by Christians:

Religiously motivated attacks started during Darwin’s lifetime. In 1874 Charles Hodge, an American Protestant theologian, published ‘What Is Darwinism?’, one of the most articulate assaults on evolutionism. Hodge perceived Darwin’s theory as “the most thoroughly naturalistic that can be imagined and far more atheistic than that of his predecessor Lamarck.” He argued that the design of the human eye evinces that “it has been planned by the Creator, like the design of a watch evinces a watchmaker.” He concluded that “the denial of design in nature is actually the denial of God.” Other Protestant theologians saw a solution to the difficulty in the idea that God operates through intermediate causes. The origin and motion of the planets could be explained by the law of gravity and other natural processes without denying God’s creation and providence. Similarly, evolution could be seen as the natural process through which God brought living beings into existence and developed them according to his plan. Thus, A.H. Strong, the president of Rochester (N.Y.) Theological Seminary, wrote in his Systematic Theology (1885): “We grant the principle of evolution, but we regard it as only the method of divine intelligence.” The brutish ancestry of man was not incompatible with his excelling status as a creature in the image of God. Strong drew an analogy with Christ’s miraculous conversion of water into wine: “The wine in the miracle was not water because water had been used in the making of it, nor is man a brute because the brute has made some contributions to its creation.”
The fundamentalist, evangelic Christians [An organized, militant Evangelical movement originating in the United States in 1920 in opposition to Liberalism and secularism, emphasizing the literally interpreted Bible as fundamental to Christian life and teachings] remain opposed to the theory of evolution. They believe in Creationism (also called Creation Science, or Scientific Creationism), a counterrevolutionary, fundamentalist theory or doctrine, that postulates that matter, the various forms of life, and the world were created by God out of nothing. Biblical Creationists believe that the story told in Genesis of God’s six-day creation of all things is literally correct. Scientific Creationists believe that a creator made all that exists, but they may not hold that the Genesis story is a literal history of that creation. Some conservative religious groups, however, have argued that Darwinian evolution alone cannot account for the complexity of the living world and have insisted that certain biblical descriptions of creation are revealed scientific truth. In the early 20th century, some areas in the U.S. banned the teaching of Darwinian theory, which led to the famous Scopes Trial (“Monkey Trial”) of 1925. Many creationists now work toward ensuring that schools and textbooks present evolution as a theory that is no more provable than biblical creation.
Arguments for and against Darwin’s theory came from Roman Catholic theologians as well. Gradually, well into the 20th century, evolution by natural selection came to be accepted by the majority of Christian writers. Pope Pius XII in his encyclical Humani Generis (1950; “Of the Human Race”) acknowledged that biological evolution was compatible with the Christian faith, although he argued that God’s intervention was necessary for the creation of the human soul. In 1981 Pope John Paul II stated in an address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences: ‘The Bible itself speaks to us of the origin of the universe and its make-up, not in order to provide us with a scientific treatise but in order to state the correct relationships of man with God and with the universe. Sacred scripture wishes simply to declare that the world was created by God, and in order to teach this truth it expresses itself in the terms of the cosmology in use at the time of the writer. . . . Any other teaching about the origin and make-up of the universe is alien to the intentions of the Bible, which does not wish to teach how the heavens were made but how one goes to heaven’.

Islamic Perspective:

The gradual process of evolution is not alien to the Muslim thinkers, according to Dr.Hamid Ullah; centuries before Darwin, the Muslim thinkers; Al Jahiz (776-868 C.E) and Ibn Miskawayh (930-1030 C.E) presented the idea of human evolution in their books titled; ‘Akhwan-al-Safa’ and ‘Alfawz ul Asghar’ which mention that: God first created the matter , which developed to mist or smoke, then water, subsequently developed in to solid mass like stones,  then plantation, trees closer to animals. Amazingly these thinkers were not condemned for such non conventional ideas. The date palm tree is very close to the animals, it has distinct male and female trees. Even if all the trunks of normal tree are chopped off, it still survives but if the top of date palm tree is removed the tree dies; hence it is closest to the lowest form of animals and highest form of plants. It develops in to the lowest form of animal, which develops in to monkey, to human  to angel. Finally is the return to God (Qur’an;2:46,156, 21:93, 23:60). It is generally perceived that; God created the first man with clay as a sculpture, breathed spirit,  this was Adam, may be it happened as such but God repeatedly mentions in Qur’an;40:67, 35:11, 22:5 and 18:37; that He created the man “from dust, then from a sperm”; obviously the sperm is not created from dust. The sperm is created from animal or man, hence God passed over all the intermediary stages by referring to the ‘dust’ as the origin, the medium is the sperm of man which grows as a child in the womb of women. Qur’an also mentions: “when He has created you in gradual stages (atwaaran)?” (Qur’an;71:4); the word atwaara is derivate of tatur (evolution), hence it may also imply that God created human through evolutionary stages i.e. solid mass – plants – animal: this being an other perspective of human creation.
The creation process is executed by God in two ways: Firstly; the instant execution through His Command (am’r) (Qur’an;3:47, 54:50). Secondly; through gradual evolution (khalaq), like the creation of universe in six eons (Qur’an;32:4, Exodus;20:11). Some of the modern non traditional scholars, well versed with the modern knowledge argue that, since the latest scientific information and knowledge was not available to the classical commentators, hence any new interpretation with in the parameters of fundamental Islamic doctrine based on Qur’an and Sunnah may be acceptable. The concepts of evolution by  Al Jahiz and Ibn Miskawayh were based on their thought process not the scientific research. The significance of knowledge is self evident, Allah says: “..Are the knowledgeable and the ignorant equal? In fact, none will take heed except the people of understanding.”(Qur’an;39:9);“He also made subservient to you whatever is between the heavens and the earth; all from Himself. Surely there are signs in this for those who think.”(Qur’an;45:13);“Will they not then ponder on the Qur’an?..” (Qur’an;4:82);“Allah has revealed the most beautiful message, a Book consistent in its verses yet repeating its teachings in different ways..”(Qur’an;39:23).
Some thinkers try to get the support for ‘developmental’ process of creation by non traditional interpretation of Qur’anic verses, by synthesizing the scientific information. Allah says: “Have they not pondered upon themselves?” (Qur’an;30:8); “Has there not been over Man a long period of Time when he was nothing--(not even) mentioned?” (Qur’an;76:1); “Now let man but think from what he is created!”(Qur’an;86:5); “And ye certainly know already the first form of creation: why then do ye not celebrate His praises?(Qur’an;56:62);“every living thing created from water”(Qur’an;21:30); “Indeed We created you, then We formed you,”(Qur’an;7:11); “And Allah hath caused you to grow as a growth from the earth,”(Qur’an;71:7). (also Qur’an;2:155-156, 3:142, 4:82, 6:134-136, 7:11, 10:4, 11:56-57, 14:19, 15:21, 21:30, 22:5-6,23:14, 27:64, 29:19-20, 30:8, 35:16-17, 38:28, 46:3, 55:49-50, 56:62, 65:12, 67:1-2, 70:40-41,  71:7,13-14, 76:1, 84:16, 86:5, 89:19, 91:9-10).
The famous Islamic philosopher, mystic and theologian Mohay ud Din Ibn Al Arabi (born, 1165, Spain died, 1240, Damascus) in his great work The Meccan Revelations, (a personal encyclopedia covering all the esoteric sciences in Islam and his own inner life), narrates a Hadith attribute to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) who said: “One hundred thousand Adams came to this world- we are descendants of the last Adam”. According to an other tradition; Once Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) requested God for some wonder – God ordered Moses (peace be upon him) to reach a particular place, which  was in a desert with no living being around. There he found a big ditch, Moses (peace be upon him) threw a stone in to the ditch , an unknown voice from ditch asked; ‘Who are you?’. Moses (peace be upon him) was proud of his knowledge, he introduced himself narrating his ancestral link with Adam (peace be upon him). The mysterious voice said; “About which Adam you are talking about? after every 100,000 years some human comes here and throws a  stone, once asked, he narrates same ancestral link which you have narrated.” Hence this ditch is being filled with stones, 100,000 Adams! The humanity has been created and destroyed 100,000 times. God knows best

The modern theory of evolution has two basic flaws: It observes in fine details the gradation of species from one-cell organisms up to the chimpanzee and man, who the theory considers to be the next in line. Advocates of the evolution theory have admitted this and sought to explain by speaking about a “missing link”. The other basic flaw in this theory is that it cannot be proven in any scientifically acceptable way. Its argument is rather didactic. It makes a huge jump from scientific observation to theorization about life and existence. Thus, it imposes its theory on scientific findings. Perhaps it is appropriate to state that Muslim scientists have observed the gradation of species, not only in the animal world but also in the world of plants. They referred to the fact that there is a very fine line which separated one species from the next. They also observed that there are gaps: The one which separates the highest from the lowest, i.e. the chimpanzee from man. However, Muslim scientists did not seek to impose any arbitrary theory of life on their findings. They simply attributed this gradation to its appropriate cause, the will of Allah, the Creator of all. However on the basis of information which Allah has clearly provided in the Qur’an: “O mankind! We created you from a single pair of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes that you might get to know one another. Surely the noblest of you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous. Allah is All-Knowledgeable, All-Aware.”(Qur’an;49:13). The first human came into existence as a result of Allah’s will when He decided to appoint a vicegerent on earth. Adam, the first human was created of clay and Allah breathed of His spirit into him. Therefore, man is the result of a combination of clay and spirit. How did Allah breathe His spirit into Adam whom He made of clay and when did all this happen, these are the details which He has not chosen to disclose. The knowledge of such details will not be of any help to human in the fulfillment of the task i.e. the building of human life on earth, through His obedience (worship) and service to Allah. Had such information been of benefit to humanity in this regard, it would not have been withheld. 

DNA: Evidence of Intelligent Design or Byproduct of Evolution?

What does Programmed Reality have to say about DNA? 
by Jim Elvidge

DNA is a self-replicating nucleic acid that supposedly encodes the instructions for building and maintaining cells of an organism. With an ordered grouping of over a billion chemical base pairs, which are identical for each cell in the organism, the unique DNA for a particular individual resembles statements in a programming language. This concept is not lost on Dr. Stephen Meyer (Ph.D., history and philosophy of science, Cambridge University), who posits that the source of information must be intelligent and therefore DNA, as information, is evidence of Intelligent Design. He argues that all hypotheses that account for the development of this digital code, such as self organization and RNA-first, have failed. In a well-publicized debate with Dr. Peter Atkins (Ph.D., theoretical chemistry, University of Leicester), a well-known atheist and secular humanist, Atkins counters that information can come from natural mechanisms.

Unfortunately, Atkins resorts to insults and name calling, so the debate is kind of tainted, and he never got a chance to present his main argument in a methodical manner. But it raised some very interesting questions, which I don't think either side of the argument has really properly addressed.
Violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
Intelligent Design advocates trot out the Second Law of Thermodynamics and state that the fact that simple molecules can't self-replicate without violating that Law proves Intelligent Design. But it doesn't really. The Second Law is the idea that the total disorder of a system, e.g. the universe, always increases. Or that heat always flows from hot to cold. It's why coffee always gets cold, why money seems to dissipate at a casino, why time flows forward, why Murphy had a law, and why cats and dogs don't tend to clean up the house. However, the law applies to the whole system, including many instances of increased disorder weighed against the fewer instances of increased order. In other words, while there are distinct probabilities of isolated cases of increasing order, those probabilities are outweighed by the cases of decreasing order. It is not unlike the wave function distribution of quantum mechanical states. There is a finite probability that electrons will pass through normally impenetrable boundaries. In fact, this tunneling effect is what enables some semiconductors to perform their functions, so we know that the effect is real. However, in the majority of cases, the particle will be stopped by the barrier, just as in the majority of cases of a closed system, entropy will increase. In summary, disorder tends to increase, but that doesn't mean that there can't be isolated examples of increased order in the universe. That seems to leave the door open to the possibility that one such example might be the creation of self-replicating molecules.

Another point of contention in this “origin of life” debate relates to the nature of
information, such as DNA. Meyer’s case is weak if he is making a blanket assertion that information can only come from intelligence. I could argue that, given a long enough period of time, if you leave a typewriter outdoors, hailstones will ultimately hit the keys in an order that creates recognizable poetry. So the question boils down to this - was there enough time and proper conditions for evolutionary processes to create the self-replicating DNA molecule from non-self replicating molecules necessary for creating the mechanism for life?

Doing the Math
The math doesn't look good for the atheists. Francis Crick, molecular biologist, physicist, and Nobel Prize winner for the discovery of DNA, once commented on the miracle of constructing a single protein from evolutionary combinatorial selection: "all the cell need  do is to string together the amino acids (which make up the polypeptide chain) in the correct order. This is a complicated biochemical process, a molecular assembly line, using instructions in the form of a nucleic acid tape (the so-called messenger RNA). Here we need only ask, how many possible proteins are there? If a particular amino acid sequence was selected by chance, how rare of an event would that be?... the number of possibilities is twenty multiplied by itself some two hundred times. This is conveniently written 10260, that is a one followed by 260 zeros!"
1 Dr. Robert L. Piccioni, Ph.D., Physics from Stanford says that the odds of 3 billion randomly arranged base-pairs matching human DNA is about the same as drawing the ace of spades one billion times in a row from randomly shuffled decks of cards.
Dr. Harold Morowitz, a renowned physicist from Yale University and author of Origin of Cellular Life (1993), declared that the odds for any kind of spontaneous generation of life from a combination of the standard life building blocks are one chance in 10100000000000 (you read that right, that's 1 followed by 100,000,000,000 zeros).
2 Famed British Royal Astronomer Sir Fred Hoyle proposed that such odds were one chance in 1040000, or roughly "the same as the probability that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard could assemble a 747."3
By the way, scientists generally set their "Impossibility Standard" at one chance in 1050 (1 in a 100,000 billion, billion, billion, billion, billion). So, it seems that the likelihood of life forming via combinatorial chemical evolution is, for all intents and purposes, zero.

Other Ideas
Perhaps discouraged by the straight combinatorial odds against life forming, scientists have ratcheted up the creative thinking and come up with some interesting new ideas that could explain how life formed naturally from the primordial soup. One such idea, explored by Michael Yarus of the University of Colorado at Boulder, and validated by David Johnson and Lei Wang of the Salk Institute for Biological Sciences in La Jolla, California, is that certain RNA building blocks (amino acids and nucleotides) have a chemical affinity for one another. This affinity tends to line up the right molecules to form self-replicating chains of RNA, which led to the formation of DNA and life.

4 Essentially, this idea changes the odds that we discussed above. Instead of purely random associations of life’s building blocks, we would be dealing with less than random processes. But how much less than statistical randomness is the million-dollar question. Slightly less, and we still have a massive improbability. Significantly less, and perhaps life could have formed naturally.

DNA as a Program?
My interest in this goes beyond this specific debate. I have a hobby of collecting
evidence that our reality is programmed. My book, The Universe – Solved! is chock full of such evidence. Clearly, if DNA is data as Dr. Meyer suggests, that data may be either the result of, or the input to, a program. If so, it is at a very high level. By that I refer to the level of hierarchical programming.
When you build a house, you don’t start with raw materials, like trees, metal, and plastic.
Instead, you have building blocks – windows, 2x4s, pieces of plywood, concrete, tiles, wallboard, shingles, nails, etc. So it is with programming. It is much easier to use, write, and understand a program that consists of building blocks than a “linear” program that has, for example, 42,000 sequential lines of code. In the building blocks for the house, some components, such as a sink, are themselves composed of other building blocks (bowl, plumbing, faucet). Similarly, software may consist of building blocks, which are composed of smaller building blocks. Such programming is called hierarchical programming. The basic rules are that the lower the layer (toward the bottom of the chart), the more fundamental the operation. The bottom layer of the chart would typically be “atomic” operations that any higher layer function can use. For convention, let’s refer to this lowest layer of functions as Level 1. The higher you go on the chart, the more “sophisticated” the operation is. Creating a set of virtual doors, for example, is a
much more sophisticated and higher layer function than drawing a point, and might be a Level 5 function or so. Also, no function on any layer calls, or makes use of, another function on that layer; rather, they use lower layer functions to build up their capabilities.
Outlining a good hierarchy would consist of ensuring that each function at a particular layer is roughly comparable in terms of sophistication. A function called AddTree should be at the same layer as AddCloud, for example, while AddForest and CreateSky would each be at the next layer up.

If our reality is, in any sense, programmed, then the lowest layers of the program must be below our current ability to observe. That is, the objects that are under programmatic control have to be smaller and more fundamental than subatomic particles. Currently, we can make physical observations of items as small as electron clouds around carbon atoms, which are on the order of 10-10 meters. We can infer from high-energy experiments, such as those in progress at the Linear Hadron Collider at Cern, deeper details about the structure of the nucleus and subatomic particles. From those experiments, we can infer structures down to 10-16 meters, at the level of quarks. At some point, in a programmed reality, all structure is simply information. It is interesting to speculate about where that
might occur on the spatial scale.
One logical point could be at the Planck level, or 10-35 meters. This is the granularity of space, according to physicists. The figure below shows how the position of a point in space can be determine ever more accurately as you zoom in on the region of space, effectively continuously increasing the magnification. Were space truly continuous, there would be no limit to how far you could zoom; there would always be space between any two points on which you could zoom further. However, physicists tell us that when you zoom in to the scale of 10-35 meters, something really strange happens. It becomes impossible to position this object or point between two Planck lengths (1.6 x 10-35 meters) because nothing exists there. In fact, space does not even exist between two adjacent points separated by the Planck length. It is sort of analogous to your TV or computer screen. From a distance, you see a nice continuous image. But, when you get close up, you see that the image is nothing but a bunch of dots at discrete positions on the screen and there is actually no part of the image in between two adjacent dots. We therefore say that rather than being continuous, space is discrete, granular, or quantized. At this point, our object under measurement can only be exactly at one of those positions.
So, it is possible that the pure informational structure of space begins at the Planck level. That would mean that the “program” is controlling information at that fine of a resolution. Of course, it could even be finer than that. The quantum mechanical strangeness found at the Planck level may simply be due to the physics of the program, unattainable to our perception due to these laws, while reality is actually constructed at an even deeper level. Alternatively, the physical laws that cause quantum mechanical properties may be just rules of the program, whereas the granularity of reality is courser than the Planck level. All of these three options are possible in a programmed reality.
All we really know is that it is currently beyond our capacity to resolve. In any case, the informational content of reality is deeper than the base pairs on DNA strands. But it doesn’t mean that information can’t exist in a higher level construct, just as cells in a spreadsheet contain data, but the presentation of that spreadsheet is done by a program at a much deeper level. The question is whether or not the information contained in the DNA code is indicative of intelligence. Is there some sort of “signature” or “watermark” in the code? Some evidence of intelligence that has nothing to do with the functioning of the molecule? So far, there isn’t, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be looking for it.
References:
1. Crick, Francis. Life Itself, Its Origin and Nature. Simon and Schuster; 1st
 edition. 1981. pp 51-52.
2. Hoyle, Sir Fred. Nature, vol. 294:105, November 12, 1981.
3. Morowitz, Harold J. Energy Flow in Biology. Academic Press, 1968
4. Brahic, Catherine. “Self-starter: Life got going all on its own” New Scientist, 21 April 2010.
Source: http://www.theuniversesolved.com/article_dna.pdf

TOP DNA SCIENTIST CONVINCED OF GOD - YouTube

www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5bPbwkjKMM
Dec 3, 2012 - Uploaded by David Curwen-Walker
The more we understand science, the more we can believe in God ... It is those scientists whobelieve in a naturalistic explanation for the  ...

DNA Structure and Function -

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_POdWsii7AI

Sep 28, 2013 - Uploaded by Amoeba Sisters
Explore the structure and function of DNA with the Amoeba Sisters! Music Credit: Adrian Holovaty ...

DNA Structure [HD Animation] -

www.youtube.com/watch?v=88AxCUE1rwQ

Mar 5, 2014 - Uploaded by Biology / Medicine Animations HD
See an organised list of all the animations: http://doctorprodigious.wordpress.com/hd-animations/
  1. Story image for the intelligent universe fred hoyle pdf from Wall Street Journal

    Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God

    Wall Street Journal-25-Dec-2014
    But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. ... Doesn't assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions ... Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his ...
  2. Story image for the intelligent universe fred hoyle pdf from EarthSky

    How galaxies evolve in the cosmic web

    EarthSky-03-Dec-2014
    Astronomers believe the earliest universe was nearly uniform as it ... Such a 'skeletal' universe must have played, in principle, a role in galaxy ...
  1. Story image for the intelligent universe fred hoyle pdf from National Geographic

    Does the Big Bang breakthrough offer proof of God?

    CNN (blog)-23-Mar-2014
    If the universe did indeed have a beginning, by the simple logic of cause and effect, ... Atheist-turned-agnostic astronomer Fred Hoyle, who coined the term “Big Bang,” .... and http://www.defenselink.mil/news/casualty.pdf ...... All of this because your intelligence is challenged and your logic is put on check!
More: 
  1. The Intelligent Universe  by Fred Hoyle: Fred Hoyle was an important scientist who worked at the frontiers of astronomy and theoretical physics. In 1983 he published a well illustrated popular book for nonscientists in which he attacked the whole idea that life originated and evolved on Earth and replaced it by 'intelligent cosmic control: http://wasdarwinwrong.com/pdf/korthof47.pdf
  2. Science finds Godhttp://justonegod.blogspot.com/2015/01/science-finds-god.htm
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~ ~ ~  ~
Humanity, ReligionCultureSciencePeace
 A Project of 
Peace Forum Network
Books, Articles, BlogsMagazines,  Videos, Social Media
Overall 2 Million visits/hits
http://JustOneGod.blogspot.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~