A very good book on science apologetics was published recently, called “The Comprehensive Guide to Science and Faith: Exploring the Ultimate Questions About Life and the Cosmos“. Well, there’s an ongoing series of posts about the book at Evolution News, and one of them caught my eye. They are talking about the origin of life, and what’s needed to create life from non-life.

Here is the post from Evolution News.

The article starts by explaining the what is required to show how non-living components could be organized into a living system:

• plausible biochemical paths from individual bio-building blocks like amino acids or nucleic acids to functional polymers such as proteins and DNA.
• ways to speed up chemical reactions that are naturally slow.
• the ordering of amino acids in proteins and nucleotide bases in RNA and DNA that allows them to function properly.

The leading naturalistic explanation to solve these problems is called the “RNA world” hypothesis:

The most popular proposal for the first self-replicating molecule is RNA — where life was first based upon RNA carrying both genetic information (akin to modern DNA) and performing catalytic functions (akin to modern enyzmes), in what is termed the RNA world.

The article lists several problems with the RNA world hypothesis. Dr. Walter Bradley lists two of those problems.

First, the assembly of RNA requires intelligent design:

First, RNA has not been shown to assemble in a laboratory without the help of a skilled chemist intelligently guiding the process. Origin-of-life theorist Steven Benner explained that a major obstacle to the natural production of RNA is that “RNA requires water to function, but RNA cannot emerge in water, and does not persist in water without repair” due to water’s “rapid and irreversible” corrosive effects upon RNA.³ In this “water paradox,” Benner explains that “life seems to need a substance (water) that is inherently toxic to polymers (e.g., RNA) necessary for life.”⁴

To overcome such difficulties, Benner and other chemists carefully designed experimental conditions that are favorable to the production of RNA. But Robert Shapiro explains that these experiments do not simulate natural conditions: “The flaw is in the logic — that this experimental control by researchers in a modern laboratory could have been available on the early Earth.”⁵ Reviewing attempts to construct RNA in the lab, James Tour likewise found that “[t]he conditions they used were cleverly selected,” but in the natural world, “the controlled conditions required to generate” RNA are “painfully improbable.”⁶ Origin-of-life theorists Michael Robertson and Gerald Joyce even called the natural origin of RNA a “Prebiotic Chemist’s Nightmare” because of “the intractable mixtures that are obtained in experiments designed to simulate the chemistry of the primitive Earth.”⁷ In the end, these experiments demonstrate one thing: RNA can only form by intelligent design.

The second problem is that the RNA world hypothesis is that it requires the existence of a self-replicating RNA molecule in order to get started. But this self-replicator contains a lot of biological information that is beyond the reach of chance to produce:

The most fundamental problem with the RNA world hypothesis is its inability to explain the origin of information in the first self-replicating RNA molecule — which experts suggest would have had to be at least 100 nucleotides long, if not between 200 and 300 nucleotides in length.¹⁰ How did the nucleotide bases in RNA become properly ordered to produce life? There are no known chemical or physical laws that can do this. To explain the ordering of nucleotides in the first self-replicating RNA molecule, origin-of-life theorists have no explanation other than blind chance. As noted, ID theorists call this obstacle the information sequence problem, but multiple mainstream theorists have also observed the great unlikelihood of naturally producing a precise RNA sequence required for replication.

Whenever I sit down to write some code or to write a blog post, I can start with one letter, then add another, then add another, until I have a functioning program, or a legible blog post. It might be possible for random chance to make a meaningful word out of 3 letters, like “the” or “hat”. But it’s not possible to make a self-replicating RNA molecule that way. The required sequence is just too long, and every letter has to be just right in order for it to function as a self-replicating system. The simplest self-replicating molecule is extremely complicated.

Anyway, check out the article, and if you want to read all about Walter Bradley (my role model), there is a new book out about him called “For a Greater Purpose: The Life and Legacy of Walter Bradley” which I finished, and it was great.

Previously, I had blogged about a small study published in 2018 by Brown University’s Dr. Lisa Littman. That study was controversial, because it falsified the narrative about transgenderism held by secular leftists. The new study, published in March 2023 in Archives of Sexual Behavior, confirms the Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria theory first advanced by Littman. Let’s take a look.

The study is here, on Springer Link.

Excerpt from the Abstract:

During the past decade there has been a dramatic increase in adolescents and young adults (AYA) complaining of gender dysphoria. One influential if controversial explanation is that the increase reflects a socially contagious syndrome: Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD).

We report results from a survey of parents who contacted the website ParentsofROGDKids.com because they believed their AYA children had ROGD. Results focused on 1655 AYA children whose gender dysphoria reportedly began between ages 11 and 21 years, inclusive. These youths were disproportionately (75%) natal female. Natal males had later onset (by 1.9 years) than females, and they were much less likely to have taken steps toward social gender transition (65.7% for females versus 28.6% for males). Pre-existing mental health issues were common, and youths with these issues were more likely than those without them to have socially and medically transitioned.

Parents reported that they had often felt pressured by clinicians to affirm their AYA child’s new gender and support their transition. According to the parents, AYA children’s mental health deteriorated considerably after social transition.

Breitbart reported about the study and noted:

When asked if their child had friends who “came out as transgender around the same time,” 55.4 percent said “yes,” with that response being significantly higher for females, (60.9 percent) than it was for males (38.7 percent).

[…]The study also revealed that parents said they oftentimes felt pressured by clinicians to go along with their child’s new gender identity and support their transition. The parents added that their children’s “mental health deteriorated considerably after social transition.”

[…]Parents also estimated that before developing gender dysphoria, their child was spending an average of 4.5 hours per day “on the internet and social media.”

When asked whether a stressful event in their child’s life may have contributed to the onset of gender dysphoria, 72.6 percent of parents answered “yes.”

One of the differences between men and women, in my experience, is that the majority of men tend to generate their worldview by making plans that are likely to achieve goals, whereas the majority of women tend to get their goals from the culture, and pursue those goals by doing what feels good “in the moment”. I have been told this by women who were never like this, and by women who grew out of this once they experienced failure. That’s why transgenderism is especially problematic for girls, because if it is being spread by social cues and pressures, then girls are typically going to be more susceptible to that than boys.

Let’s talk about the previous study.

Here’s how the study was first reported by Science Daily:

This month, a Brown University researcher published the first study to empirically describe teens and young adults who did not have symptoms of gender dysphoria during childhood but who were observed by their parents to rapidly develop gender dysphoria symptoms over days, weeks or months during or after puberty.

[…]The study was published on Aug. 16 in PLOS ONE.

Peer pressure / The Internet:

The pattern of clusters of teens in friend groups becoming transgender-identified, the group dynamics of these friend groups and the types of advice viewed online led her to the hypothesis that friends and online sources could spread certain beliefs.

[….]”Of the parents who provided information about their child’s friendship group, about a third responded that more than half of the kids in the friendship group became transgender-identified,” Littman said. “A group with 50 percent of its members becoming transgender-identified represents a rate that is more 70 times the expected prevalence for young adults.”

Mental disorders / traumatic events:

Additionally, 62 percent of parents reported their teen or young adult had one or more diagnoses of a psychiatric disorder or neurodevelopmental disability before the onset of gender dysphoria. Forty-eight percent reported that their child had experienced a traumatic or stressful event prior to the onset of their gender dysphoria, including being bullied, sexually assaulted or having their parents get divorced.

This article at The Federalist had a few examples to illustrate the conclusion of the study. I’ll pick two.

The study includes other eye-opening information, such as case studies of several children’s stories.

• “A 14-year-old natal female and three of her natal female friends were taking group lessons together with a very popular coach. The coach came out as transgender, and, within one year, all four students announced they were also transgender.”

• “A 14-year-old natal female and three of her natal female friends are part of a larger friend group that spends much of their time talking about gender and sexuality. The three natal female friends all announced they were trans boys and chose similar masculine names. After spending time with these three friends, the 14-year-old natal female announced that she was also a trans boy.”

I thought this quote from that article was interesting as well, given the culture’s obsession with “bullying”, which is a nebulous term that can mean actual bullying, or mere disagreement.

The study also may indicate that school “anti-bullying” programs typically created by LGBT activist organizations such as the Human Rights Campaign may help accelerate children identifying as transgender by pushing peers and authority figures to profusely express their support.

Coming out as transgender means instant fame and popularity, because you’re a victim, and everyone has to be nice to you… or else:

“Great increase in popularity among the student body at large. Being trans is a gold star in the eyes of other teens,” wrote one parent on the study response form. Another wrote, “not so much ‘popularity’ increasing as ‘status’ … also she became untouchable in terms of bullying in school as teachers who ignored homophobic bullying …are now all at pains to be hot on the heels of any trans bullying.”

So becoming transgender has social rewards, especially for people who are being bullied. White girls are constantly being bullied for their race in public schools, so identifying as transgender is a quick and easy way for them to get out of the oppressor class and into the victim class

I’ve always been suspicious of women who make a living through their physical beauty. I see a few problems with modeling as a career. First, you don’t have to produce anything useful that requires understanding the real world, like a programmer or a nurse. Second, you focus a lot on your appearance, and that’s not healthy, since it all fades out by age 35 anyway. Women who get a lot of attention for free typically don’t know how to treat men, either. They don’t learn because they don’t have to learn.

With that in mind, here’s an article by an aging 38-year-old model that illustrates the problem:

Earlier this month I opened the door to a bouquet of flowers.

They were from yet another man who wants to date me. He’s 35, tall, dark and handsome.

[…]And this week, as the gifts roll in from admirers for Valentine’s Day — I have already received two…

[…]I am 38 and have been single for four years.

So, the first thing to point out about this is that it confirms what I was saying about pretty women. Look at the way she talks about how all these men are paying attention to her. Like it or not, her worldview is going to be conditioned by this attention she’s getting from men. She isn’t having to write code to get attention. Or set a fracture. Or do anything. She just gets it because she was born with good looks. And she doesn’t see that it is her job to 1) prepare her character for attracting a man who wants to commit, or 2) choose men who are interested in commitment. Her job is just to be pretty, and then tell everyone how much attention she’s getting from men. Men who will not commit to her. She is mistaking the attention for intent to marry. But men who pay attention to dumb, pretty women don’t intend to marry them. They just want to pump and dump them.

But she doesn’t see her failure to prepare herself for commitment and to prefer commitment-minded men as her problem. On the contrary – her singleness at 38 is the fault of men being worthless:

And I hate to break it to any other single women in their late thirties, but all the decent men in our age bracket have been taken.

[…]While I work out every day, these men look a decade older.

Beer bellies, bad manners, little respect for single women and minimal hygiene — I’ve seen it all on the apps.

Over the past four years I’ve been on almost 500 dates trying to find Mr Right.

And while I have become something of an expert on dating apps — last year I got a congratulations from Tinder for getting 25,000 likes for my profile — unfortunately, I am still looking for The One.

My theory is all the good men were snapped up when they were young. All that’s left is the dregs.

Now, she doesn’t think that she is the dregs for being 38 and being completely unsuited to marriage. She thinks that men are the dregs – because they don’t have an attractive height and appearance. That’s what she’s looking for – and that’s the only thing she’s looking for. She’s had relationships with men, but they just LIVED WITH HER. They never committed, because she wasn’t looking for a man who would commit, she was looking for a man with appearance, height, fitness and hygiene. Someone who looked as good as her.

Doubt me? Read her own words – this is what she values in a man:

During my 500 dates, the only guy I have seriously dated was my age and had the best hair and teeth in the world.

He even had a “proper” job and took me out for fancy dinners. Alas, he wasn’t ready to settle down — or something like that.

Apart from that, there was the guy who looked like Superman on his dating profile but turned up with a long white Santa beard. His body had gone to pot and he was wearing unwashed clothes.

Then there was the wealthy consultant who took me to his club where cocktails were thirty quid a pop. He was generous but knew the value of nothing. Plus, he continually scoffed salt and vinegar nuts on our date — the odour was revolting.

[…]Then there are the beer bellies. If a man has one, I know we’ll have nothing in common as I’m active…

And so on. Everything is about appearance. She’s looking for exactly what she is herself: a pretty face. That’s what she knows, understands and values. And she has no idea that the willingness to commit is not related to external appearances. The important thing for her is the man’s appearance. And that’s why she has 5 billion dates and no commitment. Only a certain kind of man commits. It’s going to be related to his personal character – religion, morality, etc. – more than it’s related to what she can see with her eyes.

In order for a man to stick with a woman through childbirth and aging, he’s going to have to have some reason to value her beyond youth and beauty. And not every man has such reasons. That’s why it’s the woman’s job to do two things. 1) to develop the kinds of character traits that are likely to attract a commitment-minded man, like fitness, femininity, vulnerability, trust, kindness, etc. and 2) to evaluate men and separate the ones who have a worldview that values women for more than youth and beauty.

In the case of Christian men, we are looking for women who have self-control, sobriety, chastity, fidelity, etc. And we are especially attracted to women who take God’s goals as their own, and work independently to promote the things that God thinks are valuable. Women who can defend God’s existence and reputation are highly regarded. Women who put others above their own selfish desires, especially children and animals. Women who are content at home with a non-fiction book. Women who don’t seem to waste money on entertainment, fun and thrills. The woman has to have what commitment-ready men want, and she has to know which men are ready for commitment. SHE CAN’T READ THAT WITH HER EYES OR WITH HER FEELINGS. She’s going to have to ask questions and investigate what he demonstrates about his character with his actions and accomplishments.