When Darwin advanced his theory, science did not suspect much about the presence of a living cell, and even more so about its structure. Something was known about the structure of organs, but the science was still to look into the cell level, and deeper.

What can we say about the fact that in those days about any DNA no one guessed. And if anyone guessed something similar, it was so vague that it could not become at least an obstacle to the spread of the theory of evolution.

And then it was possible to make large-scale conclusions, completely without looking at the hereditary mechanisms and the DNA program, although any modern programmer would be shocked by such reasoning.

For example, it took a reed to nibble some sort of sunflower seeds - its bite has changed, and this is surely inherited. And if this is possible, it is also possible that the scales could wear out and turn into feathers. And this, too, of course, was inherited.
')
And of course, the paws could easily turn into wings. True, not immediately, but with time. But these living beings easily flew and mastered the sky, although it took a person with reason to know how much mental and physical effort, time, trial and error, sometimes tragic mistakes, to finally repeat the achievement of those creatures - to conquer the sky. And although people did not achieve the same lightness, maneuverability, flexibility, freedom in the air, like birds, the conquest of the sky was a great achievement of the human mind.

At the time of Darwin, such explanations seemed quite reasonable and plausible. Scientists had no idea that DNA is responsible for both the development of the organism and the transmission of hereditary information - in fact, a hefty program that becomes more complicated, and the more, the higher the body is on the evolutionary ladder.

My head does not fit in how the scale could wear out to an ideal engineering design from the point of view of aerodynamics, which also has excellent strength and minimal weight. But an even greater mystery for me is how this change got into the DNA of scaly germ cells, and thus was inherited. Still, the primary is the DNA program, and not the damage the body receives - otherwise, people with injuries would be born the same children.

Moreover, at present it is not clear how surprisingly the information appeared in the DNA that allowed living organisms to soar into the sky. And this, as you understand, is not a small change - a functional has been added to hoo what. To imagine its volume, think about what is aeronautical equipment and computer systems that provide flight in modern airplanes + “pilot emulator”;)

If you are a programmer, you understand what it means to add new functionality to the code - it is not a mouse click, play toys, or, for example, hammer nails. This is a complex, creative mental work. You understand that in itself is correct, the working code does not appear. Usually it happens the other way around - randomly made changes lead to errors, often critical.

So: in order for a body to receive feathers, begin to fly, come out of the water, or become rational, the development program of this organism written in the DNA must undergo drastic changes. And this is not one or two lines or function. These are hundreds of thousands, or even millions of lines of quality code.

And who, actually, added this code? By itself? His majesty is the case? After all, he, according to the theory of evolution, is to blame for this. Moreover, in the context of changes in DNA, natural selection and other ideas are complete nonsense. It is like saying that if users constantly try to make the text very large or change colors, then WordArt code will certainly appear in the program over time. He will just have to appear. And, of course, without the participation of the programmer.

True, we are told that millions of years have passed, there have been countless iterations ... Does this change anything? Not. If you add a completely random code, compile (if at all), watch the result, and then either throw out or make new changes, but repeating this procedure very, very many times - then you will certainly get something worthwhile, such as Word, right? Do you believe it?

The mathematical probability of such an event rolls over many and many orders beyond what is called probable in science.

And here's another question: the first living cell. Who wrote her code? This is not one line of code. And not even a thousand and not ten, although this is already a great difficulty. Moreover, it should appear in the "primary broth" immediately, ready. She could not develop. There immediately had to be a minimally functioning code providing mechanisms for a) self-reproduction, b) growth, and c) survival. And it should be a working code, without critical bugs. Moreover, it’s not just that the code should appear in a vacuum - a ready-made mechanism should appear on which this code could be executed.

By the way, yes, and who will be debugging? :)

If we compare further with programming, we are assured that, first, figuratively speaking, Notepad (the first cell) appeared by itself. And then, he also himself grew up in Microsoft Office 2008. And not just Microsoft Office, but containing a program for self-reproduction. Together with iron, naturally.

If everything was so and in fact was possible, there would be no need for programmers, and we would have to change our profession.

This is only from the standpoint of classical biology, not knowing what is inside a living cell, everything is very simple. But if you go down to the molecular level (as Michael Behe does , for example ), or to the level of the DNA program, it becomes obvious that evolution does not fit into any scientific framework.

And I am truly amazed when I meet programmers who consider all this possible.

PS: And yes, DNA is, in fact, not the source of the program, but a compiled code, which only makes its evolution even more incredible.

PPS: Feathers and wings are just examples. I admit that evolutionists' views on the origin of feathers differ, but this absolutely does not change anything in the light of changes in the DNA code.

Update

Unfortunately, I have to admit that the message of the article was not heard, and the discussion turned into another evolutionary holivar, of which there are thousands in the network. I do not want to argue here - it is useless. Just my thought was different.

I will try to repeat my thought: the article dealt with the program code. The fact that the evolution of software code is impossible. The options proposed by some participants in the discussion (about billions of hard drives, about reconciliations, checks, and so on and so forth) do not at all explain the question of the appearance of program code.

If you are not a programmer, you may just find it difficult to understand. Therefore, it is not necessary to breed here the controversy about all known facts, it is not about them now. If you have material on the emergence of the program - welcome.

Further. Many of these arguments are outdated due to recent discoveries. I gave a link to the translation of the article by Michael Behe , where he sets out the essence of his book The Black Box of Darwin. Read, you will not regret.

He draws attention to the fact that when it became clear that a living cell is not “a simple, small lump of albumin combination of carbon”, but something much more complex, containing organelles, the evolutionary optimism of scientists involved in these issues diminished.

But as it turned out, the organelles are still half the trouble. Much worse than what is happening in the cell at the molecular level. There are the wildest things going on there, and there are such systems, the development of which from something smaller, by means of small changes is simply impossible. And these systems consist of many, many components.

Now, to those who do not understand what program I am talking about (and there are most of them). As already noted by many speakers, DNA contains information on the basis of which practically from nothing, various proteins are built from the chaotic soup of amino acids, which are assembled into more complex structures, in particular a cell.

The DNA describes the structure of the cell starting from the level of amino acids, i.e. from molecular level. Moreover, the structure is described not of a single cell, but of all types of cells of different tissues, which are only present in our body.

Further. In DNA, however, it describes how tissue and organs are assembled from individual cells during the development of an organism. And this, too, is not just a mass of cells collected in piles of different forms. The organs also have their own complex structure.

Further. In DNA, the creation of such an organ as the brain is also described. I heard the opinion that at the moment, the human brain is the most complex object in the universe studied by people. And this object is described in DNA . And not just described, but written a program, how to assemble it literally from scratch - with simple amino acids.

Moreover, the brain is not going to empty. It has already laid instincts. And these are thousands, thousands and thousands of behavioral programs, both relatively simple and very complex. The DNA is described much more than the instincts that control the behavior of individual individuals. In particular, it is thanks to a set of complex instincts that it is possible to maintain the ecological balance.

Moreover, the human brain, for example, has incredibly complex training programs that allow us to learn everything we want, for example, speech, music, science, we can learn to drive a car or program.

All this is only part of what is in DNA .

This is not a word for you. And not even an office. And not even any OS. People have not yet written anything that could somehow compare to the DNA program.

For a few minutes, try to imagine the "source code" of DNA. Just try. Remember the largest system you have ever worked on. And understand that this system, with its millions of lines, is complete rubbish compared to DNA.

If such software could be written by such methods that evolution offers for it, it would have been written for a long time already.

But reality is a stubborn thing. The likelihood of the appearance of the original DNA molecule with a ready-made program, so goes beyond the limits of the probable. But its development to the human DNA - at least three age of the Universe would have passed, nothing would have changed, this chain of events is simply not possible.

Even the appearance of the simplest forms of life would be the greatest luck. It was just luck. Large. Many times. Lots of. A huge amount. It's like every day throughout life to pick a jackpot at any casino in the world to choose from. Naturally, "quite by accident."

I will say more. The probability of human development (and his DNA) from the primary broth by spontaneous generation and evolution is not much more likely that the person in this broth himself accidentally “gathered”. Well, so successfully got molecules. :) It happens. :) By the way, why not a theory? ;)

The main message here is:

Programs are designed and written by intelligent beings, and do not appear in the course of "lucky coincidences"

PS: I have a lot of arguments about other moments of biological evolution, but I will not give them here, because the message of my message is not in them, I would not like to eclipse it. And I will not comment on comments that have no direct relation to the essence of my message either, sorry, but firstly, this is oftopik and holivar, and, secondly, there are many of you, and I'm alone :)

PPS: I am not a creationist.