Scientific Evidence for God.

Some scientists say that God was not needed to create life.
This statement is a philosophical assertion, not a
scientific (i.e. experimentally based) statement.
Nevertheless, it can be used to create a scientific
hypothesis that can be tested.

FIRST OBSERVATIONS.
We observe that life is composed of living cells.
A living cell is a complex system.

SYSTEMS
A system is a collection of parts that must work together to do something.
A pile of bricks is a collection of parts, but they don't work together, per-se.
However, a building made from bricks becomes a system.
The bricks must be put in a particular order to rise high, and also provide
space for other things that a building provides, such as an orderly living/working
areas, places for heating/cooling/running/electricity/water, etc.
Nevertheless, a brick building, by itself is a relatively simple system,
which leads us to complexity.

COMPLEXITY
What is complexity? Complexity has to do with the number
of interactions. Simpler things have fewer interactions.
A stick is simple. The above brick building is simple. They both have few interactions.

Complex things have many interactions.
For example, interpersonal relationships are complex, as
one must deal with how personality types, emotions, education,
past history, motivations, etc interact.

Adding the heat/water/electricity, etc to the brick structure system, makes the
building relatively more complex.

CELLS
Cells are complex. They have
a. Cell walls
b. Energy flowing in the form of ATP,
c. waste management,
d. and DNA controlling it all, through various
intermediary proteins.
e. other functions not named here.

And this is just for a single cell animal.
Multi-cellular animals (or plants) have even more
complexity, as the different organs and tissues work
with each other, and affect each other.

PROPOSED EXPERIMENT
The original assertion:

God is not needed to create life.

A testable hypothesis: (or question to test.)

Is intelligence needed to create a complex system?

PROCEDURE STEPS
Start with several different types of people. These people
will have different levels of intelligence (for example based on
any standard IQ test)

a. Take a college professor
b. An eighth grade student
c. A two year old
d. Random forces.

Have each one of the above subjects create
several systems of varying complexity.

For example
A. A Popsicle stick bridge,
B. A moon rocket
C. A living cell
D. etc.
Repeat the above tests multiple times with
different combinations of

i) people,
ii) complexity of systems
iii) types of randomly applied forces.

Look for a relationship between the level of
intelligence, and the complexity of the system.

We already know that even though someone may not have developed
a quantified equation, greater intelligence is
associated with the level of system complexity.
We see this in the American idiom, "It is not rocket science."
Meaning something is simple enough, that you don't need the brilliant
rocket scientists to solve it.

Living cells are generally considered to be more complex than
the fanciest rocket ship that sent people to the moon and back.
Based on the experimental evidence that we have, a purely
natural, dead thing has never made itself alive, we can
therefore infer,
"It took an intelligent being that is greater than
nature to create the first living cell."
This is a proof (albeit indirect) that God exists.

In other words, the assertion "God was not needed to create life."
is a purely philosophical assertion (actually a theological assertion),
and is not supported by the scientific (i.e. experimental) evidence.

In contrast, the counter assertion, "God exists", is supported by scientific evidence.
Therefore, believing God exists is actually scientific, and not just religious.

Return to Presentations on Six Day Creation