Only a small fraction of the enormous number of stimuli to the five senses is indelibly imprinted into the neurons of a human brain in one’s lifetime.  Most thoughts wash across the mind and then recede as fast as an ocean wave lapping a shoreline. Fewer thoughts linger like the ebb and flow of tides.  Then, there are the thoughts as long-lived as ice deep within a glacier, frozen within neurons unwilling to let them sublime into the ether.

I wish that I could decide which memories went into such long-term storage.  I would fill my brain with lasting memory of Trigonometry and Calculus, scientific theories and the history of mankind.  Try as I might, though, the comprehension of these important thoughts enter my brain like a skulking thief and exit like a scalded dog.  Instead, I cannot forget the Art Linkletter Show and one day in 7^th grade English when I sneezed so forcefully that another loud sound was forced out.  Some days I wished I were dead, and I probably remember every one of them, too.

The only thing I remember of the Art Linkletter Show was the regular skit of Mr. Linkletter asking a group of children questions.  On one show Mr. Linkletter asked the children where their belly button came from.  One boy explained that when God would make a person, he would finish by poking each person in the belly and saying, “You’re done!”

To a child, this is a reasonable explanation.  A child knows nothing of the development of a human from egg to newborn, at least no child of the Art Linkletter era.

To Charles Darwin, evolution was a reasonable explanation for the origins of species.  Darwin knew nothing of the complexity of organisms at the microcellular level.  He never knew of the incredible (I dare say miraculous) architectures of microscopic cellular structures working harmoniously and unerringly to produce the chemistry and body of life.  Yes, natural selection can modify a finch’s beak, but it cannot create a bird.

Evolution with its tool natural selection hypothetically chooses the “fittest of the fit”.  The fitter organisms don’t waste energy producing useless structures and chemicals.  A mammal’s eye without the enzymes necessary to produce vision would be a useless structure, and the enzymes necessary for vision without the eye would be useless, complex proteins.  A sighted organism certainly has survival advantages over an unsighted organism, but how does evolution and undirected random chance create the eye’s structure, the enzymes, the optic nerve and the area of the brain necessary for vision simultaneously?

Darwin never calculated the odds that such a complex structure as the mammalian eye could evolve concurrently with the many enzymes necessary to translate a photon of light on the retina into a biochemical stimulus of the optic nerve.  Imagine the movie director Michael Moore wearing water wings and beating Michael Phelps and six other world-class swimmers to win an Olympic gold medal.  Now, imagine the same scenario but with Moore also wearing concrete galoshes, and Moore still wins Olympic gold.  This swimming miracle is statistically more probable than evolution creating the mammalian eye.  So, unless there is some unknown, intrinsic intelligence in matter such as The Force in the Star Wars movies the odds say evolution can’t hack it.

Why then, after more than 150 years is Darwinian evolution still the theory of choice for explaining the origin of life and speciation, when at best it's an interesting hypothesis and at worst it's conjecture?  Because it has become the Holy Grail of liberalism.