Apologetics, Creation, z6

An evolutionist comes clean on the impossibility of evolution by stating we are alone

Because of the impossibility of evolution, we are alone: Image NASA | Wikipedia

Because of the impossibility of evolution, we are alone in the universe! Image NASA | Wikipedia

[by Dean Smith] Evolutionists want everyone to think that science is settled on evolution — that it is a hard, cold scientific fact. But it is actually just a theory on how life developed on earth and it’s not a very good one. The Bible is very clear that God alone created the heavens and earth and all life on our planet.

And at least one evolutionist has come clean on the impossible odds of evolution happening in a very odd way.

In a recent documentary called “Human Universe,” produced by England’s BBC, Professor Brian Cox said he does not believe in aliens or any other form of extra terrestrial life on other planets.


He says because what happened on earth was such a rare and unusual event that it is essentially impossible for it to have been repeated on another planet — this despite the fact there are billions of planets in the universe.

Brian Cox, a former rock star with a popular English band called Dare, is a physic’s professor teaching at the University of Manchester. In addition to his teaching and scientific research, Cox has hosted many scientific shows on BBC.

Now don’t get me wrong, Cox still believes in evolution, but he admits that what happened on earth was a fluke, perhaps even a bit miraculous and he says because of that, we are alone in the universe.

The Daily Mail cited some of Cox’s comments from the documentary. Cox said:

“There is only one advance technological civilization in this galaxy and there has only ever been one– and that’s us. We are unique.

It’s a dizzying thought. There are billions of planets out there, surely there must have been a second Genesis.

But we must be careful because the story of life on this planet shows that the transition from single-celled life to complex life may not have been inevitable.

We still struggle to understand how this happened. It’s incredibly unusual.”

So while Cox says evolution on other planets is in his mind impossible, somehow it still happened here. The reality is evolution was just as impossible on earth. This is without even explaining how non-organic material suddenly sprung to life — living, breathing, growing and consuming.

The Daily Mail writes:

“Humanity miraculously overcame them in a chance binding of two single cells merging somewhere in the mists of time, he [Cox] said.”

Cox says that the biggest hindrance to life on other planets is what he called “evolutionary bottlenecks.”

Pleitropy — the evolution stopper

I found it interesting Cox was honest about hindrances to evolution. In a previous post, I discussed just one of the major roadblocks to evolution.

Evolution is based on the theory of gene mutation and when a good mutation takes place it is kept and eventually after thousands such mutations take place, a new species is formed. However, there is one massive problem with gene mutations — pleiotropy (lit. more change).

We realize genes determine the color of our eyes and our hair, leaving the impression that genes only affect one area.  However, scientists have understood for years that a single gene affects multiple areas.  There is such a co-dependence between the genes that many believe a single gene that determines the color of our eyes, affects almost every other aspect of our life as well.

Sally Otto a mathematical biology professor at the University of British Columbia referring to this problem said:

“You can’t change selection in one thing, without changing everything.”

A single mutation with a positive affect in one area will invariably have a profoundly negative impact in multiple other areas. As an example, one gene mutation in fruit flies that increases its hardiness to cold made it more susceptible to starvation.

This is why in laboratory conditions they can induce gene mutations in fruit flies coming up with odd changes. But out in the wild, the fruit fly hasn’t changed because mutations have such negative effects in other areas, the mutated fly can’t survive.

It was as if God put in a safe guard to prevent this from happening.

The interdependency between the genes also reveals a design so complex, it demands a creator.

Though many atheists claim they don’t believe in God, the majority still have faith — they believe in aliens despite the overwhelming lack of evidence of their existence. According to a survey undertaken by professor David Weintraub from Vanderbilt University in Tennessee — 55% of atheists believe in aliens.


Read more:



  1. malmematics says

    So you argue against science, in favor or religion, by utilizing the very science you reject?


  2. malmematics says

    But that’s pure empty speculation on your part. Evolution is science, with many empirical studies and evidence to support it. We’ve observed evolution in action. Just because someone doesn’t want it to be true, doesn’t mean it isn’t.

    whether or not atheists believe in aliens, that has nothing to do with the validity of evolution. That’s extremely poor logic on your part. It’s interesting that you dismiss evolution because atheists belief in something without evidence (aliens), but then argue in favor of religion, which is based on faith.


    • My point is while the Atheists claim to be scientific, the majority of them believe in aliens despite the fact there is no scientific evidence for their existence. They are required to believe … it’s faith. It is the same with evolution. It is a philosophy or religion. And every now and then a scientists comes clean on it, like the person quoted in this article. He says it is impossible for there to be life on other planets. I just take his logic to the ultimate conclusion…. If it is impossible for it to happen on other planets, then…


      • malmematics says

        Actually it’s not the same as evolution. Evolution is backed by empirical evidence, something 99% of all scientists agree on. Evolution has been observed. So to deny evolution, is to deny all observations and evidence found to date.

        Actually it doesn’t matter if it is possible on other planets or not, that does not invalidate what life has done here on earth. Again, that’s poor logic on your part.

        Additionally, the case isn’t closed on whether or not life exists outside of earth. It is pure speculation either way. However, it’s worth noting that we are finding more and more evidence to suggest that life may in fact exist on other planets.


      • They are finding organic (non-fossilized) material in dinosaur bones supposedly 60 million years old? How could bones 10s of millions of years old still have organic material in them? There is only one way — they aren’t tens of millions of years old.

        But when the scientist who first found the material by accident tried to have it published in an evolutionary journal, they refused to publish it, because they didn’t believe it could happen. That isn’t science that’s propaganda — refusal to look at evidence that disagrees with your philosophy.

        Another reputable scientist was apparently fired because he also found evidence of organic material in dinosaur bones. https://opentheword.org/2014/07/29/did-finding-soft-tissue-in-a-dinosaur-fossil-result-in-a-scientists-firing/

        When it comes to evolution it seems belief determines science.

        Now that they are looking for it, they are finding organic material in dinosaur bones around the world. They weren’t looking for it initially, because they didn’t believe it existed. This is not science…..

        I have no idea what you consider to be evidence of life on other planets. NASA suggests there are numerous planets capable of maintaining life, but without having visited them, this is not science, this is sheer speculation. But again their philosophy determines their scientific views.

        The fellow quoted in this article was honest about evolution and the impossibility of it happening.

        Anyway, we will have to choose to agree to disagree.

        Thanks for your comments. But I am closing comments on this article. You are certainly free to comment on other articles that will undoubtedly be posted on this subject in the future — if you happen to be visiting.



Comments are closed.