God most likely exists

Let's start with some visualization. You are walking through the woods and see a beautiful log cabin. Do you assume: "How wonderful! The trees must have fallen in just the right place."? Of course not! How much more unlikely is it to say that the infinitely complex, orderly, and vast universe happened randomly by chance, without a creator? This is against scientific laws like the second law of thermodynamics which states entropy tends to increase. Entropy is disorder. Based on this law, how can life come from non-life, complex life from simple, and something from nothing in the first place? The origin of the universe must have been powerful, and intelligent perhaps, to cause order to exist so the process of evolution, which is not the same as the theory of evolution, could begin. But let's say the second law of thermodynamics was broken, and a sudden decrease of entropy caused the Big Bang. Is the theory of evolution scientific? Let's see what science REALLY suggests. A scientist I conversed with claimed Simple organic molecules are the building blocks of life and must have been involved in its origin. So first these organic molecules were formed, replicating molecules evolved and began to undergo natural selection, and through this process eventually simple cells were made. First of all, the scientist did not explain how exactly molecules just randomly decided to replicate. Could it be natural selection? To accept that as a possibility you would have to give natural selection a power that it does not have, the power to add new information to the genome, as is required in molecules-to-man evolution. But natural can"t do that. Natural selection works with already existing information. The scientist also claimed that in an experiment simulating the old earth"s environment RNA was made, and DNA evolved from RNA. So what about mutations? Could favorable mutations be the explanation of replicating molecules and the first cells? I found the following information, from The New Answers Book Volume 2, to be very interesting, so I will quote what it says. (BEGINNING OF QUOTE) The DNA strand contains instructions on how to make proteins. Every three "letters" code for a specific amino acid, such as TGC, ATC, GAT, TAG, and CTC. Many amino acids together compose a protein. For simplicity"s sake, to illustrate concepts with the DNA strand, I will use examples in English. Here is a segment illustrating DNA in three-letter words: The car was red. The red car had one key. The key has one eye and one tip. Point mutations are mutations where one letter changes on the DNA sequence. A point mutation in our example could cause "car" in the second sentence to be read "cat". We did gain one word (cat), but we lost one word (car) and lost the meaning of one phrase. So the overall result was a loss of information. But many times, point mutations won"t produce another word. Take for instance another point mutation, which changes "car" not to "cat" but to"caa". We did not gain any new words, and we lost one word and lost the meaning of one phrase. So again, the overall result of this point mutation was a loss of information, but even more so this time. Point mutations can be very devastating. There is a children"s disease called Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome (HGPS), or simply progeria. It was recently linked to a single point mutation. It is a mutation that causes children"s skin to age, their head to go bald at a very early age (prekindergarten), their bones to develop problems usually associated with the elderly, and their body size to remain very short (about one-half to two-thirds of normal height). Their body parts, including organs, age rapidly, which usually causes death at the average age of 13 years. (Source: B. Hodge, "One Tiny Flaw and 50 Years Lost," Creation 27(1) (2004): 33.) Not all point mutations are as devastating, yet they still result in a loss of information. According to biophysicist Lee Spetner, "All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it." (Source: L. Spetner, Not by Chance (New York: Judaica Press, 1997), p. 138.) An inversion mutation is a segment of DNA in a particular strand that reverses itself. An inversion mutation would be like taking the second sentence of our example and spelling it backwards: The car was red. Yek eno dah rac der eht. The key has one eye and one tip. With inversion mutations, we can lose quite a bit of information. We lost several words from, and the meaning of, the second sentence. These mutations can cause serious problems to the organism. The bleeding disorder hemophilia A is caused by an inversion in the Factor VIII (F8) gene. An insertion mutation is a segment of DNA, whether a single base pair or an extensive length, that is inserted into the DNA strand. For this example, let"s copy a word from the second sentence and insert it into the third sentence: The car was red. The red car had one key. Had the key has one eye and one tip. This insertion really didn"t help anything. In fact, the insertion is detrimental to the third sentence in that it makes the third sentence meaningless. So this copied word in the third sentence destroyed the combined meanings of the eight words in the third sentence. Insertions generally result in a protein that loses function. A deletion mutation is a segment of DNA, whether a single base pair or an extensive length, that is deleted from the strand. This will be an obvious loss. In this instance, the second sentence will be deleted: The car was red. The key has one eye and one tip. The entire second sentence has been lost. Thus, we have lost its meaning as well as the words that were in the sentence. Some disorders from deletion mutations are facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) and spinal muscular atrophy. There are two basic types of frame shift mutations: frame shift due to an insertion and frame shift due to a deletion. These mutations can be caused by an insertion or deletion of one or more letters not divisible by three, which causes an offset in the reading of the "letters" of the DNA. If a mutation occurs where one or more letters are inserted, then the entire sentence can be off. If a t were inserted at the beginning of the second sentence, it would read like this: The car was red. Tth ere dca rha don eke yth eke yha son eey ean don eti p. Four new words were produced (two of them twice): ere, don, eke andson. These 4 words were not part of the original phrase. However, we lost 14 words. Not only did we lose these words, but we also lost the meaning behind the words. We lost 14 words while gaining only 4 new ones. The overall effect was a loss of information. A frame shift mutation can also occur by the deletion of one or more"letters." If the first t in the second sentence is deleted, the letters shift to the left, and we get: The car was red. Her edc arh ado nek eyt hek eyh aso nee yea ndo net ip. Five new words were produced: her, ado, nee, yea, and net. However, once again, we lost 14 words. So again, the overall effect was a loss of information, and the DNA strand became smaller due to this mutation. Frame shift mutations are usually detrimental to the organism by causing the resulting protein to be nonfunctional. For molecules-to-man evolution to happen, there needs to be a gain in new information within the organism"s genetic material. For instance, for a single-celled organism, such as an amoeba, to evolve into something like a cow, new information (not random base pairs, but complex and ordered DNA) would need to develop over time that would code for ears, lungs, brain, legs, etc. If an amoeba were to make a change like this, the DNA would need to mutate new information. (Currently, an amoeba has limited genetic information, such as the information for protoplasm.) This increase of new information would need to continue in order for a heart, kidneys, etc., to develop. If a DNA strand gets larger due to a mutation, but the sequence doesn"t code for anything (it doesn"t contain information for working lungs, heart, etc.), then the amount of DNA added is useless and would be more of a hindrance than a help. There have been a few arguable cases of information-gaining mutations, but for evolution to be true, there would need to be billions of them. The fact is, we don"t observe this in nature, but rather we see the opposite, organisms losing information. Organisms are changing, but the change is in the wrong direction! How can losses of information add up to a gain? (END OF QUOTE) What God"s word the Bible says is what science really suggests. The origin of life is not nonlife, and the complex variety of life now does not have a common ancestor but, instead, humans have always been humans and the complex variety of animal life now adapted from the "kinds" of animals God created. In response, the scientist says God is just an assumption that we can not see! Saying life came from nonlife and that the complex variety now had a common ancestor, those are nonsensical ideas based on the ASSUMPTION that there is no God. Assumptions after assumptions that require a much larger leap of faith; a leap I will not make just because those ideas may be a possibility. I have explained what science REALLY shows concerning the subject of God. If you do not agree with anything I have said, I will respect that and gladly answer any questions you have. In the next round, we can talk about the Bible. Remember, we are debating if there most likely is a God or not. Whoever gives the most evidence supporting their side should get the majority of votes.