Can Evolution Explain The Origin Of Life?

DNA: The Code of Life

In particular, the discovery of DNA’s structure in 1953 made the origin of life even harder to explain. Overnight, the amount of biological information requiring explanation exploded. For instance, the human genome contains approximately 3 billion base pairs of DNA —an astounding amount of information equivalent to 800 dictionaries or 10,000 novels⁴.

Bill Gates once said, “DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced than any software ever created.”⁵ Just as software encodes digital information using binary digits (0s and 1s), DNA conveys genetic information using four nucleotides: A, C, T and G. Every three-nucleotide segment, called a codon, maps to a specific amino acid.

When it comes to software, we recognize that it relies on a set of rules established by human intelligence. For instance, the ASCII code represents the letter A as 0100 0001, but it could just as easily have been something else (like 1111 1111). The mapping is not inherently dictated by physics but by convention. Similarly, when it comes to language, the letters themselves are inherently meaningless. A string like “gbqorgnkjf dq ibsipqobe” is just gibberish, while a string like “this is a meaningful phrase” conveys functional information, but only because the letters are arranged according to predetermined rules set by English speakers.

The same logic applies to DNA. It is a coded information system that transmits genetic instructions. Critically, the relationship between codons and amino acids is not chemically determined. There is no inherent chemical reason why TGG should code for amino acid tryptophan, or why TGA should signal a stop. This mapping is arbitrary and not inherent to the DNA molecule. The question is, who came up with the rules?

Whether it is a computer program or a book, we recognize that there is human intelligence behind it. So why should DNA — the most advanced code we have ever encountered — be the one exception? The most reasonable conclusion is that DNA, too, was the product of an intelligent mind. This explains why, Francis Collins, director of the Human Genome Project and a former agnostic who became a Christian, referred to DNA as “the language of God.” ⁷

Abiogenesis: Miller-Urey Experiment

Some might argue that while evolution is currently unable to explain the origin of life, there is progress through the study of abiogenesis — the study of how life could have arisen naturally from non-living matter. They often point to the Miller-Urey experiment (1953). Electric sparks were passed through a mixture of gases thought to resemble the early Earth’s atmosphere, and this produced a few simple amino acids, which are the basic building blocks of proteins. From this experiment, some claim that life could have spontaneously arisen by chance.⁸

However, this greatly underestimates the complexity involved in what is required to produce life. To give an analogy, producing a few amino acids is like finding a few scattered bricks and claiming that one is on the verge of building a skyscraper. Yes, bricks are the basic building blocks of buildings, but a skyscraper requires millions of bricks, along with blueprints, construction machinery, plumbing, wiring, and construction crews who follow the plan. Similarly, amino acids are just the raw materials. To build even a single functional protein, one needs hundreds of amino acids arranged in an exact sequence, and the protein has to fold correctly into a 3D structure.

Let us now take a closer look at the odds of forming a protein by chance. Even a relatively small protein chain contains about 150 amino acids, each selected from 20 possible options. That results in 20¹⁵⁰ (or roughly 10¹⁹⁵) possible combinations — a number far exceeding the estimated number of protons and neutrons in the entire observable universe (about 10⁸⁰).

Only a tiny fraction of these permutations (roughly 1 in 10⁷⁷) will fold into stable, useful, three-dimensional proteins, driven by precise chemical forces. Biologist Douglas Axe calculated that even if every bacterium that ever lived (estimated at 10⁴⁰) each contributed one mutation, the chance of producing even a single functional protein is just 1 in 10³⁷. In other words, practically zero.⁹

As Scientific American stated in 1979, “merely to create a bacterium would require more time than the Universe might ever see if chance combinations of its molecules were the only driving force.”¹⁰

The RNA World Hypothesis

Furthermore, there is a fundamental chicken-and-egg problem that evolution has yet to solve. DNA holds the instructions to build proteins, but proteins are also required to interpret DNA. Which came first?

Some scientists propose the “RNA-first” scenario. RNA can carry genetic information like DNA, and can perform limited catalytic functions like proteins. This can potentially resolve the chicken-and-egg problem.

However, the RNA world hypothesis faces significant challenges. RNA is inherently unstable, much more so than DNA, and its enzymatic properties are far more limited than those of proteins. Biochemist Harold Bernhardt summarized the problems in his paper “The RNA world hypothesis: the worst theory of the early evolution of life (except for all the others)“, acknowledging that “the problems associated with the RNA world hypothesis are well known.”¹¹

A Desperate Alternative: Aliens

Faced with all these problems surrounding the origin of life question, some scientists such as Francis Crick (a Nobel laureate who co-discovered DNA) suggested directed panspermia— the idea that perhaps an advanced alien civilization deliberately seeded life on Earth.¹²

While this might seem to “solve” the origin of life problem on Earth, it merely shifts the question elsewhere. How did extraterrestrial life originate on a different planet?

Furthermore, even Crick himself admitted that this idea lacked evidence, “the scientific evidence is inadequate at the present time to say anything about the probability.”¹³ 

Intelligent Design

The origin of life is one of the greatest mysteries in science, a question for which evolution offers no answer. When we examine the complexity of a cell, the genetic code of DNA, the mathematical improbability of proteins arising by chance, and the chicken-and-egg problem between DNA and proteins, one conclusion emerges: these are not the hallmarks of blind chance or undirected natural processes, but rather compelling evidence pointing to a powerful and intelligent Creator.

Related Posts

1. Can Evolution Explain The Origin Of Species? (Microevolution vs Macroevolution)
2. Does the Fossil Record Support Evolution?