Rev. K. D. Macleod
SPLASHED across the front pages of newspapers last month was the suggestion that life existed on Mars billions of years ago. “Hidden inside a meteorite, a tantalising trace of life”, declared one headline, with an assurance which is quite unsupported by the evidence.
The reports described a piece of rock found in Antarctica 12 years ago. Could the rock ever have been part of Mars? Certainly the scenario described by the scientists who have investigated it is profoundly improbable — even if one could accept the enormous timescales involved. It is seriously suggested that about 16 million years ago a huge asteroid or comet collided with the planet Mars, exploded with more power than a million hydrogen bombs, and sent some rock fragments flying off into interplanetary space; after orbiting the sun for millions of years the gravity of other planets pulled one of these fragments out of its orbit and sent it on a collision course with the Earth.
But what is the evidence to support the claim that this rock, weighing little more than four pounds, has come from Mars? Largely the fact that the composition of the gases found in tiny pockets inside the meteorite closely match those in the atmosphere of Mars. There could, of course, be many other explanations why the gases are what they are.
The claimed evidences of life include the images of tiny structures which are seen when samples from inside the rock are examined under an electron microscope. These images resemble fossils found in rocks on Earth. The most striking of these, a tubelike object whose width is only a hundredth of that of a human hair, clearly resembles a living creature. David McKay, the leader of the team at the American space agency NASA who examined the rock, claimed that the evidence points “towards biologic activity in early Mars”. But he also had to admit that “there are alternative explanations for each of the lines of evidence that we see”.
Other scientists are understandably more cautious. William Schopf, a fossils expert at the University of California, quoted a statement of a modern astronomer, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. The claims are indeed extraordinary, but the evidence is not. Schopf pointed out that images claimed as fossils show no evidence of cells, and are too miniscule to be analysed chemically or to be probed internally.
NASA has claimed this as “arguably the biggest discovery in the history of science”. One cannot help feeling that the massive interest shown in an idea which is based on such slender evidence is due to the hope that it will prop up the theory of evolution. Any likelihood that there is life elsewhere in the universe will be used to strengthen the claim of NASA president Frank Drake: “It confirms what we’ve always believed – that life arises wherever the conditions are right.” If it were accepted that life arose in more than one site it would make the whole evolutionary framework seem so much less implausible.
It has indeed been pointed out that NASA has a vested interest in showing that life once existed on Mars. The more interest that can be generated in the possibility of life on Mars, the more funds are likely to be awarded to the organisation to finance future space missions to the planet. One can only describe the analysis of the rock from Antarctica as conjecture piled upon conjecture. A theory without a foundation is not likely to advance human knowledge in the slightest degree.
A recent book by Phillip E Johnson, Darwin on Trial, has submitted evolution to a devastating examination.1 The author is a professor of law in the University of California at Berkeley and specialises in the logic of arguments. During the nineteenth century, evolutionists looked hopefully at the fossils which had then been discovered and, while acknowledging that there were many gaps in the record, expressed the assurance that these gaps would before long be filled up by further discoveries. Johnson observes, however, that “the outstanding characteristic of the fossil record is the absence of evidence for evolution” and that “the fossil problem for Darwinism is getting worse all the time”.
Evolutionists have always taken refuge in postulating millions or billions of years to avoid the manifest difficulties of their theory. Yet some present-day observations cast doubt on the vast length of time required for the development of various natural features. For instance, Surtsey, the island produced by volcanic eruptions off Iceland in the 1960s, became within months an apparently mature island, with beaches, pebbles, sand and vegetation.
But it is the Bible that gives us the only information to be obtained about the origin of life. God brought vegetation into existence on earth on the third day of creation. He made the creatures of the air and of the sea on the fifth day and those on dry land on the sixth, with man as the last and greatest part of that creation.
To most people today the claim that the creation of the whole universe was the work of God in six days is an extraordinary claim. There is no need to dispute the claim that “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. For what evidence could be stronger than the work of God today in the new creation, transforming sinners by the power of the Holy Spirit, making them new creatures in Christ Jesus? The words of Paul are relevant here: “For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (2 Cor 4:6). To bring about both natural and spiritual life divine power is necessary.
We need never be disturbed when the claims of science contradict Scripture. Many scientists go to tremendous lengths to cover the weakness of the theory of evolution.2 We may not see it in our generation but, when sufficient evidence comes to light, it will yet be generally acknowledged that the Psalmist’s words of praise to the Most High were fully justified: “Thy word is true from the beginning: and every one of thy righteous judgments endureth for ever” (Ps 119:160).
1 British edition published by Monarch Publications, paperback, 201 pages, £7.99.
2 For documentation see Darwin on Trial, particularly chapters 11 and 12.