W W W W  World Wide Web Witness Inc.  Home Page   Contents Page for Volume  What is New







It was so  lonely, sitting up  there,  waiting for the big bang. I mean, all by itself in the uttermost  compression, the vast forces required  all concentrating in ways unthinkable, so that it should be a component of the singularity.

What sort of a component ? One which had a composition, since an explosion of colossal force does not by brutal power create items of singular complexity, delicacy and organisation, being rather a source of clangour, clash and mutual disruption. So there it was, pressed almost out of existence. In fact, unless the singularity was really of some size, it was out of existence, since immeasurable force  contracting to an immeasurable degree what is to be flung wildly in an explosion of what nevertheless is  somehow there, is a work of infinity. NO BOUNDS are in, for otherwise there would be no thing so singular, but rather something of bounded character, simply occupying space, ready for  force simply to expand it. That requires force (from  somewhere),  space (from  somewhere), explosive preparation of  force (from  some causal contrivance activated by adequate causal action, from an adequate base and basis), compressibility of the material  to be flung,  as of course the material itself, to be suited to such  flinging into such  space at such speeds, which require time, to make up such  masses of galaxies, as on this model appear  near the start*1,  and  to develop from such potential as  this remarkable material had  all  along, since if it had no potential, then NOTHING  would  be  able to induce  it  to show  what it did not have*2.

The  potential, of course, would require a magnificent matrix of compressible wonder, for it is much harder to have these  things in the compress than in ordinary item by item pageantry,  where each made thing is set down, as a builder might make bricks, and this on a space already bought,  at a time already ticking, and then set these in order, for a potential  already activated by the jointness of his creative presence on the one hand, and that minus current creativity, of the bricks, on the other. You don't  get anything  from nothing; but here, behold, we have had an enormous amount of potential and power  and space and time and the personal power  or programmatics  to make the potential, but if the latter,  then you need the former to have set up the  programs, and of course,  intelligence and inordinate power to make it all happen. Especially difficult is this compression business, which with all the paraphernalia simply assumed, in a monument to all irrationality,  and a worship of all  non-science,  manages to make itself and all the categories relative to itself and its imaginary scenario, so that things could get past nothing, which as with all inheritance, when null, has little to offer: in fact, in a word, nothing. .

Looking at the results, the concept of  all this so  compressed,  with such potential and such potent powers with a  flinging out is about as far from cognate considerations, normal to science,  as you could  possibly get.  Normally, you would say,  where is the source for the  space and time and motion and  potential and development burden, since from nothing nothing comes, and moreover,  for all this complicating of the matter, with such extraordinarily dramatic beggings of the question in the most burlesquing type of guess, and whence the stuff for the soufflé, so singular in kind and content.

 The skirting of the substance of the  entire matter, in this manner,  could only be  fit, in serious conversation, for  some work by such as Gilbert and Sullivan. It could be  called The Mickey Mouse Beginning, and  we  could  as with the Disney-esque, its rampant and perhaps sardonic ludicrousness. If of  course you just  wanted it in the beginning to occupy no space, then you simply need to have space invented as it exploded from what was not there, a sort of mental object without a mind. Time  too would have  to come, especially since to begin, you need a time measuring reality. In that even more elaborate scenario, it is like the other but the order of inventions from nothing is slightly different.  lt has all the mechanisms of advanced knowledge, and miracles of creativity*3 abound, though it is just that they are not noted, just imported from nothing living in nowhere for no reason.

Now turn to reality. You look for a basis which relates to actuality, adequate causality and lines of action which have some representation.  Obviously, when it is the creation of what was not there so that it was there, if rationality interests you, you need a competent creator. We have this facility, though of course only as ourselves in the category of derivatives, invented; but the function is there, not this time  absolutely, but in measure, to think, plan, imagine, interpret, overview, find vision, entertain purposes, have in mind change, whether catastrophic and almost endlessly devastating or splendid with great promise, or in some aspect, both.

This is something in TYPE, but not in scope, that is cognate, a close ally of what is needed in the normal way of scientific method. To be sure, you may with imagination envisage something in some ways entirely novel in your roaming, but then this is  merely to ADD to the scope of what is germane and relevant,  commended by the correlations in view, or provision for them. 

If, however, for some reason you feel moved to deny reason, then you do not help things at all; for to get it done, for your own part, as a derivative creator, you NEED reason so that you so deal with things available both visible in this world and invisible in vision, so that the wedlock of the two may bear fruit. What dismisses reason from ANY scenario, merely invalidates itself, since then its own reasonings from the outset are invalid, so causing upset to any reasoning process by which to seek rational consideration of any hypothesis presented. Models cannot flicker like the road as heat creates air of different densities; if you have one, you USE it. Otherwise you are merely adventuring like any other poet, into sound;  and indeed, poets can  far  exceed this component of their work, but model-makers cannot. The model is the seed.



 in order to sustain its theory or hypothesis, what adds non-reason or the removal or reason or some work to defy it,  is at once by its model type, mere antilogy. Then efforts to support the model are by definition defunct; or if you want to have reason invent itself, you need a basis for that, and a cause; or if you want to invent the notion of cause from  some time after things were well on  their way to beginning, than you have to forsake the relevance of any attempt you may make, to account for things before that, and then have to invent the  capacity to make things from nowhere, so that causation  could be constructed, by causal means of course, which you might condescend to specify, in a antinomy of note. It is so foolish, to  specialise in the self-contradictory, and to make laws which collide either with each other or the nature of what you are seeking to ACCOUNT for, in your presentation.

It is always hard to practise accounting without the process of accounting for things.

What is it like ?  it is like having an overall caption, after thinking of having a few  clouds in  non-space for no reason, as a start, and then throwing in the earth and order and reason, as an after-thought,  without really have to put in thought at  all: it just comes ... naturally, in the way nature does not,  even given the most extraordinary help!*4

Any attacks on reason attack the power to argue; and the invention of reason where it was not, requires not only all our other ingredients of potential and force and time and space, and pressure,  and  explosions that exhibit what was not there ever so much better, but drawn from the same nothing, the power not only  to BE  reasonable, but to MAKE things to be re-constituted in a reasonable format, so that reason might apply to them, when applied to the  worlds. As to that, it is going past merely ASSUMING the creation, begging the question about the issue as the Big Bang simply does, into inventing the genesis of causality, babe of the void, and then drawing from it, since there is nothing supposed to be JUST THERE at all. This in any rationality,  becomes creation from WHAT IS into WHAT IT CONSIGNS to exist. Thus we have simply a god-from-nothing for a good-for-nothing system which brings in various stages what is not there, to make it come there, by a compulsion which is not there, so that it might exhibit a potential it never had, for that too has to be created, from nothing on this model. It is a work of multiple import from unnamed source, which merely remains to be identified, to set the matter straight,  and make room for  what is assumed, with due titles this time, instead of incorrigible avoidance techniques.

Look, the butterfly that  stamped IS fun, in the Just So Stories of Rudyard Kipling, but who on earth would imagine it actual! It 'accounts' for things in the most deliciously ridiculous style in order to bring a sharp irony onto human pride and wilful imagination, not to say manipulation. This is because it is initially understood as an imaginative work,  laughing at the apparent folly of the actors. A butterfly with access to unlimited power,  in association with some imaginary relationship of understanding with a higher power! A butterfly with domestic problems, but such a way with him!

When however, we come to the point of not looking for  entertainment, a sense of the ridiculous as a stirring to mirth, it is another matter,  like someone drunk in the morning after the party at night.

The Big Bang which multiplies vastly the power needed to create,  from its oddball  and compressed beginnings, and accounts  for none of it, none even being verified*1 without  vast lapses, even if you grant the initial creation which is  simply not  acknowledged, becomes a rather thoughtless type of entertainment. However, as for taking it in the least degree seriously, this is the so common human failing: determination to  MAKE dreams happen, like Communism, despite the fact that  rationally they do not  work,  and practically they fail. To do this, as the  inhabitants of the USSR found, you pay*5.



Why pay ? Creation is free and so is the God who made it; moreover, it is something which in our lower and derivative measure, we  practise daily. He has  freely given us  rationality, and  to the universe,  rational investigability, so that the LOGOS, reason, cause, ground,  word, covers both and even makes them inter-relate, a just cause for a great happening. The word of God is revealed in the DNA, language not in odd scraps found in outer space, which does not oblige, but in the equivalent of hundreds of volumes of encyclopaedic extent, concerted, coherent,  commanding, mutually correlative, information with information about information added*6, mandating its preservation, projection, performance and  consequence in a setting akin to its commands, in being commandable*7.

These are commendable commands for they create, in what had been in kind already made, by means of a programmatic procedure created in the midst of their creation, so that the personal and the programmed proceed in a unison which is far  from unknown in other fields, as when a modern car is driven with the eye and the thought of the mind, using many programmed inputs as an assumed basis. Assumed ? in driving, this is assumed, for action; but the  assumption is not as to their construction, merely as to the availability! To make their operation the basis of their operation would obviously be a question of avoiding the question, as is all naturalism which desires to find from  nature, what made it, and in nature, its source.

Of course, the Bible  does refer to God stretching out the heavens (Isaiah 44:24, 45:12,18), Himself not only the source but the source of the stretching out; and  thence comes the expansive wonder like the astronomical marvel of the multitudes of stars, so much so that the very term is a celestial application! The power to project outwards, which you use when you stretch out  your arm, is a great thing, and has its macro- and micro-exhibits. What however has this to do with creation's  necessary and minimal cause! As an aspect for a given purpose  in the midst of all the other injections from adequate  grounds, even the everlasting God (alternative to nothing, which itself does not have bright expectations), in terms of a motion of expansion, it is fine. Methods of activating space and revealing a vast glory, these are of interest*7A, just as it is when someone may tread down the  accelerator in his new sports model, and reach the relevant limit, in some desert perhaps. It is a function,  a feature, and could be a stimulus for other things to happen, as  vast uncontrolled speed has a habit of doing (if you were not rational): things like accidents and the ruin of what had been in the first place,  reasonably created, your car.

Interesting are such possibilities, but  as soon as you  begin to KNOW what an author or creator REALLY did or had in mind, as  Professor  C.S.  Lewis showed concerning theories about the motives or basis of his own works, it is marvellous how much imagination is merely thick-headed surmise, totally presumptuous ponderings on possibilities, by one  who does not KNOW the author himself, personally.

Creations from nothing existing in a question-begging  milieu at 'the beginning' are mere avoidances by aversion. They do not work logically. The 'singularity' of course is not some collection of the unthinkable in the spotty speck that is not visible, but what DOES have the power to create and extend at will, with space and our time in the ambit of innovation, namely God. He is the singularity, the incomparable power and mind and spirit, sufficient, eternal and competent, from which the probings of the product, such as  man, has its functional  base and basis. It is the sufficient One who is the ONLY ONE, not spawn of nothing, not product of a system  from nothing, itself contrived; and He is not under pressure from what is not created, or duress from what is,  as if it controlled its articulator and Maker.

Absent mindedness about the necessary power for all things, does not remove its necessity. He is not under  unacknowledged wraps, as in that other in sufficient singularity of the imagination, itself gift of nothing, but IS like nothing else. That is the nature of the source of  'nature': sufficient, eternal, active, producing schemas, beginnings, conclusions, omitting nothing as if results needed no causes, providing all - even the liberty with which to insult Him, or  assault Him indeed, on the occasion of His taking the form of man to  do a work which man has required since he first fell into his  state of  denial (cf. Romans 1:17ff.).In this, he increasingly now specialises,  like someone an habitual smoker in principle,  and for the sake of principle, however unprincipled it might be so to  act.

 Being from  eternity, in an ambit beyond our  time, so that never is nothing the position which would be  fatal to any logical account, and necessarily so, God simply uses His powers as He wishes, and creates in the style He desires, and judges the results. Where the creation,  as here, includes liberty to hate Him and deny Him and caricature Him as endlessly done, and replace with matter the mind that made matter a rational subject  for  research, then the judgment impinges on the  creatively endowed,  that is, for example, ourselves. Wilful fraud, woeful fascination with the grossly irrational, such things have costs whether in finance or family, industry or commerce, diplomacy or war.

Payment is no more myth than creation; what IS myth is the assumption of inadequate cause for exhibited effect. That is the very nature of myth, and the character of the Big Bang and its correlative imaginary actions.  For  clarity, we must realise that a movement out,  like a car speeding West, is not THE creation, but, frankly, movement out. It is an additive which exhibits grandeur on a  colossal scale,  like a vast sheep station covering a significant slice of Australia, but with a homestead and basis on one home on perhaps one quarter of one acre! The one exhibits something of the character of the other, a certain  ... singularity in spirit.

Such myths as this Big Bang are becoming the cultural coin of our Age (just as the USA has had  IN GOD WE TRUST written on its very coins, the stuff of commerce), as predicted in II Timothy 4. It is great to rest from  endless and pointless  reductionism which tries to make everything ONLY THIS, or  ONLY THAT, and to ignore*8 what in functional fact, it is. Life begins not at 40 or 60, mature joys varying in their major impact on a  given life, but at the  liberation  from the sins of blindness, so that one may at last open the eyes on duty and justice, beauty and grace, personal spirit and celestial attestation,  as in the incarnate Christ, and find a whole world above the created one, source and meaning of it, in terms of which creation came, and to which it is bound. True, bounders may bound away, but the truth does not go with them, continuing without difficulty, when some of the tiny fragments created, get distortion into their spiritual lenses, and cannot rest except they are denying the very spirit in terms of which their very denial is even possible.

It is  time to move on from  agitation, cogitation to aspiration and conclusion.  God make man upright but he has made many inventions! (Ecclesiastes 7:29). This may be rendered as in the NKJV, "sought out  many schemes."  He even invents, in irrational deeds of intellectual derring-do, how he was made, like a cleaner lad in a studio, instructing Michelangelo on art, knowledge and their composition. In this case, it is infinitely worse!

Living in the spiritual slums of uncoordinated reductionism and unsystematic irrationality might be fine for those for whom the only option is a death of anguish and torture; although at that, the price is still far too high. There is perhaps for some a certain ease in living in slums, no pretensions; but there is often found with it, sleaze. Lacking riches is one thing,  moreover; throwing them cavalierly away, and bringing many to poverty with you, and teaching them how to be poor, this is quite another thing.

When God wrote the DNA, using one language for all life with such miniaturisation devices as  to enable,  as  Denton states,  all the DNA to be stored in one teaspoon full*9, He did not stop at that. The exquisite result of fabulous mathematics and symbolic logic was not give so that free beings might not speak, or think, or choose  ... He also gave words for thought,  spirit, soul,  life,  direction, magnificently free from mere force; though the truth within these has force, without compulsion. This is love, to cherish your creations (as some do their dogs, which are not really their creations, except in aided growth and training), and show them the way, without treating them as mere conformists. Love requires liberty or it is just a name. Loving because this is the program, is not love, since it lacks appreciation in the mode of love, being a behavioural analogy only.

God sent a model with the Bible, duly predicted to remove any possibility of rational doubt, making all testable both in and through Him, to this day, where His words work to the last detail in history. His name is Jesus Christ. As the Son of the living God, He is Son in singularity; just as the Father of this eternal Son (as appointed in heart before time was), is a singularity. As one Being where this WORD of God, the living word, is God with the Speaker, there is a singularity. There is infinite intimacy between Speaker and  Spoken, a living unity not synthesised but eternally extant. As to Him, He does not explode into being from nothing for no reason from nowhere. He is simply there, as logic requires and events confirm, verify and validate (cf. What is the Chaff to the Wheat Chs.-  4).

The mountains are beautiful, but if you are not there, they are hard to appreciate. God is there, but if you are not there with Him, He is so much harder to  appreciate.  Taste and SEE that the Lord is good. He is the Father of spirits (Hebrews 12:9), the King of eternity (Acts 15:17, Isaiah 57:18,Romans 11:36),  and the Creator who redeems. How ? Why through what happened in an historic event, the cross of Calvary (Galatians 1,  3, 6:14), when He was voluntarily smitten for what we of the human race have done (Isaiah 53, I Peter 2), the sins of mind, body and  spirit, so that in perfect justice the judgment of God is averted (Romans 3:23-27, 5:1), Christ being great enough, pure enough and powerful enough to bear all for all who would come to Him,  and offer the same all to the rest, with an intensity which saw Him weep for the fruits of unbelief(Luke19:42ff.).

Here is the figure that Europe needs (Ezekiel 21:26-27, Isaiah 45:23-24, Philippians 2), but will not take; that woeful warriors in their mutual distrust and war, need to meet; but they repeatedly, will not. Last time, as in Matthew 23:37, it was Jerusalem which WOULD NOT; now it is the world (John 17:9). Those in it, they are one element; the system and  structure of rule, it is quite  another.

In both cases, SOME come; in both many do not. What is it like ?  Some  wood can be magnificently moulded, and saw-dust is the residue. Some are fashioned by God (II Corinthians 3:17-18) in liberty and love; and some prefer to be the dust which does not stay, and blows away, the  chaff of  residue (Psalm 1). Justice is a hard thing to bear when you reject mercy. Some sins are singular, in type, but their singularity lies in their squalid character, dissociation from joy, engineering works for guilt, host of the deprivation of all that man aspires to, when he does aspire, and not merely respire. Where he prefers to lie hidden in imaginary singularity, when his sins are multitudinous in avoiding the God who is better than sad singularities, visited on mortals by the distortions of their own moribundity, so he makes his bed. Death is the opposite of life (John 10:10), and it is readily available (John 8:24).





See on this and other failures in  verification, the following:

That Magnificent Rock, Models and Marvels where noted;

Dig Deeper, Higher Soar ...  Ch.1.


*2 See Nothing  Doing from  Nothing.




Creativity is a function of a mind that creates, using thought to envelop the matter, imagination to develop it and spirit to  give it purpose  so that it might be made. Creation is any work which whether categorically from no start in a given realm (such as our own, of matter, mind and spirit), or within a given realm already made, turns what has its own limits and characteristics into what transcends these categorically, whether in one function or more, or altogether in a way in that case,  not only ordered and systematic, but meta-systematic. This is precisely what is found, the step overlooked with zeal in the plethora of pre-occupations whether with the Greeks, in atoms (forget the space about them and the designs they are placed in, just as design is in turn placed in each one of them cf. Deity and Design... esp. Sections 2 and 8), in  water, in fire, in changelessness or in change as the matrix, according to taste and pure, reductionistic, unsystematised imagination.  See Spiritual  Refreshings ... Ch.  13.

This is the nature both of what is found to transpire in this world of mind, matter and  spirit, and in logical enterprise, in which magic is an everlasting no-no, and reality requires adequate causation (cf. Causes,  and SMR Ch. 5).


*4 See The gods of naturalism have no go, Ch.  31, where the modern obfuscatory obsession with what is not as the source of what is, in layers or all at once, has a beautiful parallel in Hosea, the same spirit at work both:  over 2 and one half millenia ago,  and now. It gives a sense of  community,  like all of a village  going for ale  the pub;  though the intoxication makes it the mere shriek of obstructive will, divorced from reality, scientific method, reason and observable fact.

See also Not Only is God Great, but GloriousEpilogue.

This pursues naturalism in a political, Secret Service arena, where morals, national priorities, human degradations, pompous self-assurance  and irrational assumptions are disentangled in a far-reaching analysis, and brought to  their logical realities and revelatory exposure. The applications remain relevant.



See SMR pp. 614ff., 970ff., 925ff., Deity and Design ... 2,   News 9897, and in particular, this aspect and endnote 3.



See Waiting for Wonder Appendix, together with two sections of


First comes Ch. 5, specialising on matters of information  science, with extensive reference 
to Professor Werner Gitt's new volume, Without Excuse, then issues surrounding this are focussed both in *1A of that Chapter and in Chapter 8..



Commands here  are of great  significance and interest. They are analogous to your computer programs,  some written into the permanent RAM, and required to operate as in  a car, so that you may be facilitated when YOU choose to operate, at your own personal and imaginative, conceptual level. Commands thus add character to what in its naked state, does not achieve any such facility or functionality. They are an ordering to order (for if there were no order, there would be nothing to command, thus resembling the case of Hacker of Yes, Prime Minister fame, who being given the title, Commander of the British Empire,  remarked that he could not be clear about what it was he was to command. That becomes then something of an empty title; but the commands which do not announce themselves, but simply operate, these make a new situation entirely, just as the Egyptian slave drivers of Jews, did in Egypt. No command, the Jews live. Command the buildings 'arise'. This is the practical outcome of conception, in the domain of creation.



A different feature may be considered. Thus, those who realise the prevenience of God, may wish to show as did Descartes, some idea of how He did it, and this may have more or less profusion of amazing semi-automatic activities, which can become little more than wish-fulfilment, a sort of glide on still-waters, once your canoe is floating onward, without real  attention to detail or actuality. However, though the matter is fraught with peril in pronunciamentos, there is scope for considering the actual effects of biblical command as it is recorded to have been made, and in that  these leave null-source  options looking the more ludicrous by comparison,  and  may in fact happen to trace out some of the ways of creation, they can have value. This must be taken with extreme caution, however, as with all revisiting of creation,  especially when it is absolute creation!

See for  example,  Lively Lessons in Spiritual  Service Ch. 5



This is treated in various aspects in Deity and Design, Designation and Destiny Section 2.



The  context is contained in SMR pp.119ff., an excerpt appearing first, below.

Language: this is a way, not only to enclose thought and express it, but to secure action, in particular, with the operation of codes. It is now to our purpose to construe the place of language in the physical sub-structure of man. Man uses it mentally, but is programmed with it a myriad ways, physically. What is its place and what does it imply, and in what way does this achieve any verification of the power, presence and operation of the Almighty God, the Creator ? Let us then examine the matter.

Denton (p. 330) notes that the total number of connections in the human brain is near to 10 to the power 15, or a thousand million million. Imagining an area of the U.S. half the total, he conceives a forest at ten thousand trees to the square mile, each tree with 100, 000 leaves- and indicates the leaves in that forest equal the number of connections in one human brain. They are however co-ordinated as one whole. Thus:

Despite the enormity of the number of connections, the ramifying forest of fibres is not a chaotic random tangle but a highly organised network in which a high proportion of the fibres are unique adaptive communication channels following their own specially ordained pathway through the brain.

Using language such as this (p. 334) - "the perfection of the goals achieved" and "the genius of biological design" (cf. *31), in referring to the way the cells work, Dr Denton ponders the development recently of information technology by human intelligence, but then notes:

A chemical solution to the problem information storage has, of course, been solved in living things by exploiting the properties of the long chain-like DNA polymers in which cells store their hereditary information. It is a superbly economical solution. The capacity of DNA to store the information needed to specify an organism as complex as man weighs less than a few thousand millionths of a gram. The information necessary to specify the design of all the species of organisms which have ever existed on the planet ... approximately one thousand million, could be held in a teaspoon and there would still would be room left for all the information in every book ever written.

Not satisfied with noting this micro-assemblage of maxi- information, he refers also to the "genius of biological design" in the cell's capacity to synthesise organic compounds. His descriptions in minute detail bring realisation of the exquisite care and intelligence used in such intricate models of design efficiency, solutions to delight the pure mathematician and astonish the engineer. His comparison of a cell with a city is an enthralling exposure of the detailed, intensive and extensive use of intelligent coded language to secure a vast collation of vertically integrated industries .

Part of the marvel aspect is this. "The size, structure and component design of the protein synthetic machinery is practically the same in all cells. In terms of their basic biochemical design... no living system can be thought of as being primitive or ancestral with respect to any other system, nor is there the slightest empirical hint of an evolutionary sequence among all the incredibly diverse cells on earth." (*22).

Indeed, comparing this with the "great morphological divisions, where empirical evidence of intermediates is lacking", he notes even a conceptual problem for any idea of evolutionary development. (Op.cit. p. 250.) (All emphasis added.)

The unique yet identical language used in all living things, in the code format, together with the above noted design paradigm, is of course precisely what a mind in charge would be expected to show; or at the least, it comports to perfection with such an activity. Strivings for effect - as in a poet's forsaken first drafts, are not necessary when dealing with the Almighty. Behold, the linguistically codified cell!

Darwin's frankly admitted problem with the eye is of course not only multiplied in degree, vastly, by all this wonder of mathematical complexity; but the whole exposure to intellect is so total and precise, the whole structure and function so overwhelmingly more than human in the intelligence of its scope and format, that the idea of postulating that intelligence was not operative in producing the highest known exhibits of intelligent design is perversity in process! It would require a re- definition of terms.

Denton, as we earlier noted, considered the number of connections between cells in the brain. However, beyond this, there is the multitudinous variety of the assemblage provision within each one of the cells, including those for its own reproduction. An intensively coherent, pragmatically proportioned, technical brilliance of a virtuoso, minus... the essential virtuoso, is the problem... of the evolutionist.

No hypothesis could be more total in disregard of the facts than this. Seeing baby watches operating on a beach, each timepiece spawned from older ones by invisible processes: this would be nothing compared with what every one of us has in the body. To specify chance as the cause not only of law, but of logic, language, brilliance of concept, efficiency of architecture, subduing of materials to specifications not only statable but stated: this is merely to 'take' from definable disordered disorganisation the height of law and logic, to invest them with design and reduce it all to language. That, in turn is a contradiction in terms. Neither language nor matter is so mastered. The only way such things happen in this universe, is by having them pre-slotted, so that things fall into place simply because there is somewhere to fall. Things falling upward... this is self-contradiction. But what of a pre-programmed universe so slotted?

Such a programmed universe required to subdue chance to its order would need a programmer. However no evidence of such processive, progressive programs for leaping the 'gaps' or, indeed, making the declivities, is at hand. Evolution stoops to the ground and is confronted only with more microscopic evidence that creation not only occurred but is not occurring; that there is not even any discernible method for it to occur in the arrival of the prodigies, so desperately assigned to its ... hand ? but then, it has no hands, nor anything to help, being merely a conceptually self-contradictory mirage in the machinating mind of man.

Denton on pp. 32 ff. gives more data on the 'marvel' which is the cell. It is fascinating that the technology is far in advance of at of our own civilisation with its hundreds of years of applied intelligence (*23); and that this technology is basic to the most elementary known life (*24).

As with instincts, so with cells, the level of thought and language control implicit, is intense. If instincts are frozen thought, programs if you will, then cells are 'frozen language and engineering': the 'freezing' taking the form of an institutionalising of thought into form.

Reverting to the expertise shown, we note Denton's statement (p. 329):

We would see that nearly every feature of our own advanced machines had its analogue in the cell: artificial languages and their decoding systems, memory banks for information storage and retrieval, elegant control systems regulating the automated assembly of parts and components, error fail-safe and proof-reading devices utilized for quality control, assembly processes involving the principle of prefabrication and modular construction... much of the terminology we would use to describe this fascinating molecular reality would be borrowed from the world of late twentieth-century technology.

Here the interesting feature is that our created minds are, after thousands of years of effort, often with the complacent assumption of breaking into hitherto unknown areas of conceptual brilliance in a dead universe, moving nearer the work of what preceded them! Our minds can follow that mind which made our minds. There is a cognate quality in our minds' operation, and the operation of the biological engineering we employ. Our 'language of thought' is correlative to the thought in the language of our cells. One mind has its thoughts in our type of thought and the type of thought background to our cells.

That of course is what creation implies. This cohesive correlation and constant inter-relation of language and system in ever-expanding circles of interaction: this is what a mind so readily and characteristically does, when it is effective. We are observing the operation of God's mind in the work of ours: His work on our sub-structures, and our work on understanding the same. To 'explain' the unique criteria of mind, by its absence... that is a work of rebellion, not reason. The fact that such a theorising does not work, is not seen to work, and has no 'theoretical basis' is merely another way of saying that it is obstructionist fantasising. (Cf. pp. 13 supra, 135, 213, 263-268, 291, 307 infra.)

Correlative with the above is the scientific  approach to information (cf.  Not Only is God Great, but Glorious Ch. 5), and the long-standing challenge on this issue. Since it involves systemisation of thought, code-object correlation and operability on such designations, it is a multiple  mental thing in its own kind (cf. Jesus Christ, Defaced, Unfazed ... Ch. 4, The Wit and the wisdom of the Word of God ... Ch. 2), and the  empirical result found is co-ordinate with that fact. Information,  carefully defined as by Professor Gitt, does not 'arise' without sufficient cause in its own field, namely intelligence.