In my view the single strongest
argument against theistic
evolution is that the
information in living things and
the overwhelming complexity of
that information could not have
been generated by natural laws
and random processes given a 4
billion year old earth and a 16
billion year old universe.
In fact the atheist, Thomas
Nagel, recently wrote a book
called Mind and Cosmos and he
said there are at least two
things that atheists and
Darwinists simply cannot
explain.
And the first is the origin of
life from non-living matter.
'It's impossible to ask me to
believe,' he said, 'that that
could happen by natural law and
random chance.'
And the second is from that
first cell the overwhelming
development of staggeringly
diverse beings that are highly
complicated.
You ever looked at the human
brain? That things complicated
and Nagle's said, 'I can't bring
myself to believe that that
could happen by Darwinian
processes and natural law.'
He says 'I hope I don't have to
appeal to the god hypothesis
because I don't want there to be
a god.'
He says that in his own book, 'I
don't want to live in a universe
where there's a cosmic
authority.
But at this point I'm stuck and
I'm looking for options.'
