Today, I want to share a few thoughts with you about fingerprints.
We are all aware that when we press our fingers down on any surface, an impression is left on these surfaces and this impression is known as our fingerprint.
When do we acquire our fingerprints? A baby acquires fingerprints while still in the mother’s womb, sometime between the 11th and 16th week of gestation. There is no scientific evidence to show that either the mother or the baby consciously determine the baby’s fingerprints.
Are fingerprints permanent? Yes, they are. Scientific study has shown that a person’s fingerprint does not change after ageing and even after minor injuries.
Do conditions in the mother’s womb influence fingerprint patterns? No. There is no scientific study to show that a particular set of conditions lead to a particular kind or range of fingerprints. The established fact that even twins do not have identical fingerprints, clearly indicates that external conditions in the womb have no impact on the design of fingerprints.
Are fingerprints unique? Yes. In hundreds of years of scientific research and data compilation not even a single case of two individuals having identical fingerprints has been recorded, not even among identical twins. In addition, no single person has ever been found to have the same fingerprint on multiple fingers. According to one study the statistical chances of two people having identical fingerprints is one in 64 billion.
So, what’s the point of narrating these facts? They point to the presence of a Creator who is in charge and in control of creation. That is the only rational explanation which can satisfactorily account for the uniqueness of fingerprints. Atheists will of course argue and point to ‘random chance’ which is the bedrock on which the foundation of their hallucinatory castle of ‘evolution’ rests but then atheists have never allowed minor things like proof and statistical probability to come in the way of their magnificent ‘fairy tales.’ When they can believe without any scientific evidence or explanation that the first ‘life form’ came into existence ‘by chance’ on earth, when they can believe that thousands of factors like the water cycle, distance of earth from the moon, hosts and parasites existing together, etc could all fall in place perfectly in existence on earth ‘by chance,’ will they baulk at claiming that the explanation for uniqueness of fingerprints of billions of babies is ‘random chance?’
If the atheists want us to believe that everything and everyone is here ‘by chance’ and has evolved by ‘sheer good luck,’ then, they need to demonstrate to us: (1) how pregnant mothers/babies in the womb/pregnant mothers working in tandem with babies in their womb consciously imprint fingerprints designed by them on the fingers of the baby; (2) how mothers and/or babies ENSURE that the baby’s fingerprints are different from those of billions of other people on this planet.
For non-atheists, i.e. rational thinkers, the odds of one to 64 billion is too much. If billions of babies were born, are being born and will be born without even one instance of duplication, then ‘random chance’ is unacceptable as a rational explanation. There has to be a better, credible explanation. The only solution which suits the facts is an external Creator. We may not have seen such a Creator, we may not know anything about such a Creator, we may find it hard to believe in a Creator who is not detectable by our human senses; but, the only rational explanation acceptable to questioning minds, on this particular issue is an external Creator.