Evidence for God in Life Design Archives

September 22, 2025September 21, 2025

Glowing Birds-of-Paradise

Some of the most colorful and fascinating birds are the more than 40 species in the Paradisaeidae family, known as birds-of-paradise. They are more than just colorful; they are extravagant in their ornamentation and in their mating rituals. We have previously looked at the King of Saxony bird-of-paradise and Wilson’s bird-of-paradise. Studying these birds always reveals something new. In February 2025, a team of researchers published a new study about glowing birds-of-paradise.

Birds-of-paradise inhabit the rainforests of New Guinea and Australia, where they showcase their dazzling colors and remarkable features. Rene Martin, a University of Nebraska ichthyologist (a scientist who studies fish), specializes in deep-sea glow-in-the-dark fish. Some of her colleagues mentioned birds that seem to gleam, which led her to expose some specimens of birds-of-paradise at the American Museum of Natural History to UV light.

What Martin discovered was glowing birds-of-paradise. Thirty-seven species showed biofluorescence under ultraviolet light. Seeing them with human eyes was impressive, but for the specialized eyes of birds, it must be even more dramatic. Unsurprisingly, the males glow the most. For example, the entire belly of the male king bird-of-paradise seems to glow under UV light. Females exhibit some scattered and subdued glowing areas, which might help them camouflage in the sun-dappled rainforest. Meanwhile, the biofluorescence of the males could enhance their brilliant colors in the dark rainforest.

The discovery of these glowing birds-of-paradise reminds us that it’s easy to overlook what is right in front of us. Edwin Scholes, founder and director of the Cornell Lab of Ornithology’s Birds-of-Paradise Project, said, “Just when people think, ‘Oh, we must know everything there is to know about birds-of-paradise,’ we find something completely mind-blowing. There’s still a lot to be discovered.”

What new insights will science uncover about God’s creation in the coming days and years? The more we learn, the more we realize the truth of Romans 1:20, which tells us we can know there is a God by the things He has made.

Reference: allaboutbirds.org

September 19, 2025September 18, 2025

The Homochirality of Organic Molecules

Yesterday, we discussed the chirality, or handedness, of molecules, especially amino acids and proteins. The homochirality of organic molecules refers to their requirement for the same handedness, a mystery that has puzzled scientists since 1848, when Louis Pasteur first observed that some life-essential molecules had mirror-image forms. Amino acids used by living cells and the proteins they build have left-handed chirality, while DNA, RNA, and the sugars forming their building blocks are all right-handed. These facts raise a question for those who believe life arose spontaneously.

Left-handed proteins and right-handed DNA are found in all living organisms. The spiral structure of DNA needs to twist in a specific direction to function properly, but what caused the right-handed sugar molecules to come together? When half of all amino acid molecules in nature exhibit right chirality and the other half left, what force could have gathered only the left-handed ones to form the first proteins?

Scientists have speculated that cosmic rays or polarized light might have triggered this process. However, even if such forces created an initial bias for the same-handedness, they could not sustain and amplify it enough to produce a significant number of homochiral molecules to form the first living cells. In 1999, researchers proposed that electron spin created magnetism, causing left-handed peptides (short chains of amino acids) to bind to magnetic surfaces like magnetite. But this still did not explain how the homochirality of organic molecules could be amplified sufficiently to generate living cells.

Some scientists consider RNA to be the key to the origin of life. In 2009, a group of researchers studying RNA molecules suggested that a crystal called RAO could react to produce two of RNA’s four nucleotides. In 2023, other researchers used magnetism to produce RAO crystals with homochirality. However, this process required a magnetic field 6,500 times stronger than Earth’s magnetic field. Additionally, RAO has only been shown to produce two of RNA’s four nucleotides, still falling short of generating the complete homochirality of molecules needed for life.

As 2024 ended, NASA-funded research identified a problem with the so-called “RNA world” hypothesis. Simulating early Earth conditions, they found that RNA did not show a chemical bias toward selecting homochiral amino acids. The current thinking is that the homochirality of organic molecules “could have emerged through later evolutionary pressures.” In other words, we have the “evolution-of-the-gaps” theory because, of course, evolution can do anything you can imagine.

Currently, NASA scientists are analyzing samples brought back from asteroid Bennu, hoping that molecular evidence from meteorites and asteroids will demonstrate that the building blocks for life came from beyond Earth. I suspect that the force responsible for bringing life to Earth did originate outside our planet, and even beyond the universe.

References: science.org and nasa.gov

September 18, 2025September 18, 2025

Left-Handedness of Proteins and Amino Acids

About 9.2 percent of people are left-handed. In other words, less than 10 percent of humans exhibit left-handedness. However, the proteins in living organisms are 100 percent left-handed. I know proteins don’t have hands, but using the term “handedness” helps to explain how proteins are structured. Proteins are made from amino acids, which fold into left-handed shapes that enable their functions in living beings. These proteins are composed of amino acids, which are also left-handed.

This handedness is more accurately called “chirality.” There are over 500 different amino acids, and they exhibit both left and right chirality. However , only 22 of them are used to make proteins, and their chirality is all left-handed. This creates a mystery. If amino acids existed on early Earth in equal amounts of right- and left-handed forms, and life requires only left chirality, how could life have formed spontaneously? Some thus-far unexplained force would have to select only left-handed amino acids to come together to get life started. Robert F. Service, writing on science. org, called this “an enduring mystery.”

Scientists have proposed several ideas to explain why proteins are left-handed. Some suggest meteorites delivered left-handed amino acids to early Earth. It appears that meteorites are rich in these amino acids, likely due to exposure to polarized light. Another hypothesis is that magnetic fields on early Earth twisted the biomolecules. Robert Service asks, “But even if some external force imparted an initial bias, what propagated it?”

Gerald Joyce, a chemist specializing in the origins of life and president of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies, said, “Perhaps it was just a statistical coin flip that caused an original bias toward building blocks of one-handedness to form. But once that coin flipped, it caused other coins to flip.” Those of us who believe in a Creator are often accused of using a “God-of-the-gaps” explanation for life’s mysteries. To me, this explanation for the left-handedness of proteins sounds like a “coin-flip-of-the-gaps.”

Reference: science.org and Science magazine, Vol 383, Issue 6686

September 17, 2025September 15, 2025

Axolotls, or Mexican Salamanders

People often call them Mexican walking fish, but they are not fish. They are amphibians, specifically salamanders. Axolotls (Ambystoma mexicanum) or Mexican salamanders look like a fish because it never fully leaves its larval stage.

Unlike other salamanders and frogs, axolotls do not go through metamorphosis. When they become adults, they still look like tadpoles. They develop tiny legs but keep their gills instead of growing lungs and moving to land. The external gills and caudal fin, which are usually only found on salamander larvae, give axolotls a fish-like appearance.

Genetic differences lead to four color variations, from black or olive to pale pink or gold. They eat insects, worms, and small fish by sucking food into their mouths like a vacuum cleaner. In the wild, they are critically threatened and close to extinction because their last native habitat, Lake Xochimilco, is being overtaken by urban growth from Mexico City. However, many of these salamanders are bred in captivity as exotic pets and for research.

Axolotls are valuable for studying heart and nerve functions. They have an incredible ability to heal themselves, capable of regenerating severed limbs and some internal organs. Their injuries heal without leaving scars. Axolotls can also accept transplants of organs, eyes, or even brain parts without rejection issues.

Scientists study axolotls to discover new secrets of healing. God has given us many resources in the natural world and the ability to learn from them. As we have said many times, science and faith are friends, not enemies.

September 16, 2025September 15, 2025

Natural Environment and Pain Relief

Experience has shown that spending time outdoors in a natural environment can help relieve stress and promote relaxation. A new study indicates that there is also a connection between the natural environment and pain relief. It may be surprising that enjoying the beauty and peacefulness of God’s creation can actually reduce the sensation of pain.

To create a controlled laboratory test, the researchers used images and sounds. For a natural setting, the test subjects were exposed to images of a lake surrounded by trees and hills, accompanied by birdsongs and wave sounds. For an urban setting, the subjects viewed an urban lake surrounded by tall buildings with traffic and construction sounds. The third group saw an office scene with computer and fan sounds. The researchers performed MRI scans on the brains of dozens of test subjects while they were exposed to these fake laboratory environments.

For the test, the subjects were exposed to shocks of increasing intensity while the researchers monitored their MRIs. The test subjects exposed to the urban and indoor environments showed the expected brain activity when sensing pain. However, the areas of the brain that receive pain stimulus (nociception in medical terms) were dulled when viewing the natural environment. You could call it “natural” pain relief. According to Maximilian Steininger, who authored the study, they found that the pain relief was not just a placebo effect. It really worked.

The results of this study could be helpful for healthcare facilities and hospitals. Perhaps that’s why my dentist has a nature scene picture on the ceiling above the patient’s chair. Perhaps he should add some natural sound effects. However, creating a natural scene in the lab (or dentist’s office) cannot compare with the real thing. When feeling pain (or stress), getting outside to enjoy God’s creation might be the best medicine. A real connection exists between the natural environment and pain relief. Enjoying God’s creation also inspires us to worship and thank Him for the beauty we enjoy in the outdoors.

Sources: Discover Magazine September/October 2025, page 20, and nature.com

September 12, 2025September 12, 2025

What Makes Humans So Special?

Many animal rights advocates argue that we should treat animals the same as humans. To do otherwise is what they call “speciesism,” and they consider it perhaps even worse than racism. Why should humans be favored over other species? What makes humans so special?

An article in Scientific American caught my attention. It was written by Kate Wong and titled “Humans Are Not So Special After All.” The article points out that since 1960, when Jane Goodall observed a chimpanzee using grass and twigs as tools to coax termites from their nests, people have discovered that animals can do things previously thought only humans could do. Wong suggests that humans are not unique and that even plants can think and count.

Observations have shown that animals can perform amazing feats, but isn’t it possible that they do these things because they were programmed for survival by their Designer? It seems to me that the examples Wong provides fall short of proving her point. What makes humans so special involves more than the intelligent actions animals perform.

One example Wong uses is that brown capuchin monkeys decline a treat when they see another receiving a better one. She claims this shows a “sense of fairness,” but couldn’t it also indicate a sense of greed? She states that apes, monkeys, and elephants “mourn the loss of bonded individuals.” However, those species are programmed with a group/herd mentality that depends on each other for survival. She also mentions how mice and rats are affected by the pain or suffering of a fellow species member; but rather than compassion, could that not be fear for their own safety?

Wong also mentions an orca that made worldwide headlines for carrying her dead calf for 17 days while swimming 1,000 miles. To me, that appears to be a programmed survival instinct that failed to recognize there was no hope for the calf’s survival. The Eurasian magpie that “recognized itself” in a mirror reminds me of a turkey rooster that “recognized” his reflection in my basement window and kept tapping on the glass to challenge this supposed “competitor” for his territory.

For an example of plant “consciousness,” Wong presents the Venus flytrap and the fact that it “remembers” being touched. After two touches, it closes to trap the insect. After five touches, it secretes enzymes to digest the prey. But this does not demonstrate “thinking.” It is very simple to program a counting subroutine that causes a device to perform an action after two, five, or any number of signals from an outside source. That is programming, not thinking. The same applies to plants that produce chemicals summoning predators for defense when an animal chews on them. Again, it seems to be a survival program built into the plant.

Wong mentions anthropomorphism as “ascribing human thoughts, feelings, and motivations to animals.” While that is something people often do—particularly with dogs—I think Wong herself may be guilty of it.

The bottom line is that none of the examples Wong cites can compare to what makes humans so special. Humans alone are created in the image of God. We have minds unlike the brain functions of any animal. When we see animals do amazing things, we should give credit to the Creator who gave them those survival abilities.

Reference: “Humans Are Not So Special After All” by Kate Wong in Scientific American, September 2025.

September 9, 2025September 8, 2025

Microbiomes in Living Tree Trunks

A study of microbiomes in living tree trunks reveals that the woody tissues of trees contain a trillion microbial cells in addition to the actual tree cells. This includes single-celled bacteria and archaea, which are specialized for different parts of the tree and for various tree species.

The research team, led by Jonathan Gewirtzman of Yale University, studied more than 150 trees across 16 species in the northeastern United States. The trees examined included red maples, black birches, and white ashes. They discovered that microbes can live in both the outer sapwood and the inner heartwood, with each region hosting its own microbiome. Sapwood is mainly inhabited by microbes that require oxygen, while heartwood contains anaerobic microbes.

The study shows that microbiomes in living tree trunks vary from species to species. But how do these microbes get inside the trees? It might happen through wounds or openings, or they could be passed through the tree’s seeds. Perhaps, there is another route scientists have yet to discover. Regardless of the method, Gewirtzman explains, “What looks like one thing is a trillion-in-one organisms living together.”

When you see a tree, you might not realize how intricate its design is. Genesis 1:11-12 states, “Then God said, ‘Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds,’ and it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seeds according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seeds in it according to their kinds.”

Like many other living things, scientists are only beginning to understand the complexity of microbiomes in living tree trunks. We can recognize that there is a God through the things He has made, including trees. (See Romans 1:20.)

Reference: dnyuz.com

September 4, 2025September 3, 2025

Why Are There So Many Species?

How many species of living things exist? So far, scientists have identified, classified, and named 1.2 million species, according to worldatlas.com. The same source states there are about 8.7 million species on Earth. Nobody knows for certain, but other estimates—excluding viruses and bacteria—range from 10 million to 100 million species. Why are there so many species of living things?

How quickly are scientists discovering and describing new species? According to worldatlas.com, they identify and assign genus and species names to 15,000 to 18,000 new species each year. At that rate, if we assume 1.2 million have already been named and there are 10 million in total, the task will take over 500 years, but that’s a conservative estimate. Clearly, biologists still have a lot of work ahead.

There are between six and seven thousand known mammal species according to ourworldindata.org, . But the insect world surpasses that number. For example, beetle species alone number between 350,000 and 400,000. Each year, biologists identify most of the “new species” from museum specimens discovered earlier but not carefully studied. Some species in the wild are facing extinction, and some specimens in museums may already be extinct.

We may ask, “Why are there so many species?” God created diverse kinds of living things and endowed them with the ability to adapt to different environments. Each new species fills a niche in the incredible diversity of animal and plant life that makes our existence possible.

We have previously described the various taxonomic classifications used to categorize living things. (You can read that HERE.) “Species” is the lowest and most specific taxonomic category used by scientists to describe life forms. God created humans with an insatiable curiosity and an amazing ability to organize and categorize information. Then, He gave us plenty of life forms to study. We believe that we can learn more about God as we explore His creations. (Romans 1:20)

September 3, 2025September 2, 2025

Neanderthal DNA and Humans

Neanderthal Fossils and Humans — Neanderthal Skull

Skeptics try to disprove the Bible by claiming that Neanderthal fossils invalidate the biblical account of humans’ special creation.

The Neanderthal story began in 1856 when remains were found in a cave in the Neander Valley, 8.1 miles east of Düsseldorf, Germany. A few years later, Charles Darwin’s work was published, and skeptics argued that the Neanderthal fossils demonstrate the truth of Darwinism. Because skepticism was popular at the time, the biblical claim that humans are created in God’s image was widely mocked.

One of the most serious implications of Darwinism was related to race. Slavery was justified by claiming blacks were mere apes and whites were more evolved. Applying “survival of the fittest,” racial prejudice reached an all-time high. As science advanced, the human genome was sequenced in 2003, and Neanderthal DNA was sequenced in 2010. This research showed that the human genome contain about 2 percent Neanderthal DNA.

The Bible does not specify what the first humans looked like, but it’s almost certain they were not blond, blue-eyed, and white-skinned. If a scientist found a skeleton of Adam, what could they know about the color of his eyes or his hair? Humans have adapted over time and climate changes, which we call “evolution.” But humans are still humans, and despite having some Neanderthal DNA, we are still created in the spiritual image of God.

Reference: “Finding our Neanderthal Side” in Discover magazine, September/October 2025.

August 27, 2025September 1, 2025

Reproductive Technologies: Proceed with Caution

As medical science becomes more advanced, it offers women new reproductive technologies. Older women can now have children even after menopause. Using a sperm donor, a single woman can become a mother. A woman with no eggs in her uterus can have an embryo transfer along with progesterone injections.

In vitro fertilization, which was introduced in England in 1978, has resulted in the birth of over 12 million children worldwide. The first successful egg-donor birth was also reported around that time. Efforts are underway to improve a process called in vitro gametogenesis, which involves creating gametes from stem cells and deriving an egg from another type of cell. This technique could enable same-sex couples to have children with genes from both partners. Another possibility is to develop a synthetic womb where a baby could be grown outside a woman.

The number of women choosing to have children through technological methods is increasing rapidly. What started as a way to help women who couldn’t conceive has now become an option for women of any age or situation in life to have a child. If a woman has the resources and the desire, she can pursue parenthood. One of my feminist friends has even said that males might eventually be eliminated from the planet.

There are many unknowns in this debate that make it difficult for Christians to determine where to begin. The human genome is incredibly complex, and we cannot fully understand what is in the past of a sperm or egg donor. Who is responsible if it turns out the baby has a genetic disease or a physical or mental handicap? What psychological issues arise if a child has no father figure, or if the single mother becomes sick, passes away, or changes her mind about having the child? Will older women be able to raise children to adulthood?

Humans are essentially playing “God” with something we are not equipped to control. As an adoptive parent of three children and someone who has witnessed the collateral damage of abortion, I believe we must proceed with caution in developing reproductive technologies.

Reference: January 2024 issue of National Geographic (pages 68 -93)