While Hoyle does not believe that science can explain the spontaneous generation of life, he only recently recognized the existence of God. His prior explanation was that there was some other life in space from which we came. Deep down he believes that most scientists know this,

"My impression is that most biologists really know in their hearts the issue is there, but are so appalled by its implications that they are prepared to swallow any line of thought to avoid it. If one proceeds directly and straightforwardly in this matter, without being deflected by a fear of incurring the wrath of scientific opinion, one arrives at the conclusion that biomaterialists with their amazing measure of order must be the outcome of intelligent design. Problems of order, such as the sequences of amino acids in the chains… are precisely the problems that become easy once a directed intelligence enters the picture." ²

I couldn't have said it better myself. There must be a greater intelligent designer to put together the complicated pieces of life. Many scientists simply don't want to commit to the existence of God so they avoid the subject altogether.

Interestingly, in 1981 the London Daily Express published an article headlined, Two skeptical scientists put their heads together and reach an amazing conclusion: THERE MUST BE A GOD. This reference to Hoyle and Dr. Chadra Wickramasinghe came after they mathematically concluded that the chance of extra-terrestrial creation was no better than that of organic evolution.

Darwin anticipated this hole in his theory and addressed it in his popular work Origin of Species. He wrote about the complexity of the human eye in the chapter on Organs of Extreme Perfection realizing that this could be a problem with his theory. Darwin threw up a smoke screen by calling attention to the different types of eyes in different animals, completely avoiding the question of how those eyes came into being.

Because of the lack of scientific knowledge base on the subject, Darwin could successfully leave it at that, relying on speculation that the eye wasn't much more than a lump of stuff. In fact, not only the eye was viewed this way but the entire substance of life. The complexity of a single living cell was unfathomable in that day. Today that has changed.

Biologists have a much more thorough view of what happens behind the human eye, and the case for intelligent design is not disproved, but supported. Michael Behe, Professor of Biochemistry at Lehigh University, has documented this topic beyond question.³ Behe's fascinating description is avaialable here on knowtruth. It's not there for you to study too hard, but merely to demonstrate the complexity of human life and the functions therein. Darwin couldn't have known this.

Conclusion: A Designer