Random Chance

Ann Coulter is convinced that abiogenesis cannot work. It is beyond believability she said in an article a few years ago:

“It is a mathematical impossibility, for example, that all 30 to 40 parts of the cell's flagellum -- forget the 200 parts of the cilium! -- could all arise at once by random mutation.”
http://humanevents.com/2011/08/25/

This business of mathematical impossibility became popular with Creationists after the astronomer, Sir Fred Hoyle (Fellow of the Royal Society), delivered his Evolution from Space speech at the Royal Institution's Omni Lecture in 1982. He calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes for even the simplest living cell was one in 10^40,000 and highlighted the magnitude of that number by pointing out that the whole universe contained ‘only’ 10⁸⁰ atoms. “If one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this matter,” he continued, “without being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterials with their amazing measure or order must be the outcome of intelligent design,” adding that there was, “No other possibility I have been able to think of…” Hoyle went on to compare the random emergence of even the simplest cell to the likelihood that "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein."

Hoyle’s figures, though, are based on false assumptions. He assumed that molecules were formed by sheer chance in a completely random fashion. He also assumed that once the molecules had formed it was necessary to have thousands of them lined up in the correct order before they could join together and produce an amino acid (or whatever). He made one further assumption as well; that if the various atoms and molecules managed to get themselves all lined-up but failed to join together, then the whole shebang fell apart, and we were left with individual atoms that had to start all over again from scratch.

But Hoyle was wrong.

When a couple of atoms collide to form a molecule, they will stick together in a bond that is so strong it is unlikely they will become unstuck. Also, when more atoms collide with the newly formed molecule they will also “stick”, thus creating an even larger molecule. Then different molecules encounter each other and they, too, will stick together in an unbreakable bond. The molecules are getting ever bigger and ever more complex, and they are not falling apart; they just keep on growing. And now they are beginning to take on shapes: Some might be donut shaped, others might by cylindrical and still others might look like cubes. (OK, that’s a simplistic description, but it will do for now.)

So the molecules encounter each other and join together, but the results are not based on “random chance”. A cube-shaped molecule might hit a donut shaped molecule and nothing happens; they bounce off each other and continue on their merry way – and that will always be the case when these two molecules meet: they will never join together under any circumstances.

But then a cylindrical molecule hits a donut shaped molecule and what happens? They fit together perfectly and a new, even bigger molecule has been produced – and the same thing will happen every time these types of molecules encounter each other. Every meeting produces a result and the result is always the same – a molecule of even more complexity. A few more encounters and we shall have our first amino acid.

We can get an idea of what is going on if we play a game with ten dice and try to get a six showing on each of them:

There are six possible results with each die and the total number of possible results is,

6¹⁰ = 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 x 6 = 60,466,176

But there is only 1 way to get a six on each die, so the total number of ways to get ten sixes on a single throw of all ten dice is,

1¹⁰ = 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 x 1 = 1

So there is only one chance in more than 60 million that we can throw all ten dice and get a six-spot showing on each of them.

Suppose we rolled the dice once every ten seconds and we kept at it for eight hours per day, five days per week, fifty-two weeks per year. How long would it take to clock up 60,466,176 rolls? Just over 80 years! Of course we might get ten sixes on our first throw, but that is extremely unlikely and it is possible that we could waste our whole life playing this game and never see ten sixes after a single throw. This is a game of pure chance.

But let’s change the rules slightly:

Pick up the ten dice and throw them.

Let’s say one of them shows a six.

OK, we put that die aside and throw the other nine dice.

Perhaps we get two sixes on this second throw, so we put those two dice aside and throw the remaining seven dice.

You can already see what’s happening can’t you? We've thrown the dice only twice and already we've got three sixes lined-up with only seven more to go. A few more throws; a few more sixes and it won't be long before we have set aside nine dice with a six showing on every one of them. Roll that last die a few more times and up comes the final six. The game is over and it has taken us only a few minutes to finish with a successful result. Our earlier calculations showed that in a game of pure chance we could expect to get ten sixes only once every 80 years – but we are no longer playing a game of pure chance and it is almost certain that we will get our ten sixes every time we play, and we shall do so within a matter of minutes!

And it doesn't matter how many dice we use. If we start with 6,000 dice we will probably get 1,000 sixes on the first throw. Then we put those dice aside and throw the remaining 5,000 dice. Probably eight or nine hundred of them will land with a six face up and they, too, are put aside. A few more throws  and we will have a few more hundred sixes - and it won't be long before all six thousand dice are showing six spots. And the same thing will happen if we throw millions of dice, or even billions of them. Within a relatively short time all of them will have landed with a six spot face up.

Creationists like Ann Coulter have assumed that in the early history of Earth, the molecules had to be lined up together in exactly the right order at exactly the same time if they were to form amino acids – and Sir Fred Hoyle calculated that the odds against that happening would be about 10^40,000 to one (practically impossible).

But that’s not how it happened. As explained earlier, as each molecule was formed it was set aside (in the same way that we set aside those dice which showed a six) and slowly but surely the molecules increased in size and complexity until eventually they were configured as amino acids. It was almost inevitable.