Junkyard tornado

The junkyard tornado, sometimes known as Hoyle's fallacy, is an argument against Earth-based abiogenesis and in favor of panspermia. The junkyard tornado argument has been taken out of context by proponents of intelligent design and has since become a mainstay in the rejection of evolution by religious groups, even though Fred Hoyle declared himself an atheist,^[1], and even though the junkyard tornado argument is considered a fallacy.

The junkyard tornado argument uses a calculation of the probability of abiogenesis based on false assumptions, as comparable to "a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein" and to compare the chance of obtaining even a single functioning protein by chance combination of amino acids to a solar system full of blind men solving Rubik's Cubes simultaneously.^[2][3][4][5] It was used originally by English astronomer Fred Hoyle (1915–2001) in his book The Intelligent Universe, where he tried to apply statistics to evolution and the origin of life.^[2] Similar reasoning were advanced in Darwin's time,^[3] and indeed as long ago as Cicero in classical antiquity.^[6]

Hoyle's fallacy contradicts many well-established and widely tested principles in the field of evolutionary biology.^[7] As the fallacy argues, the odds of the sudden construction of higher lifeforms are indeed improbable. However, what the junkyard tornado postulation fails to take into account is the vast amount of support that evolution proceeds in many smaller stages, each driven by natural selection^[8] rather than by random chance, over a long period of time.^[9] The Boeing 747 was not designed in a single unlikely burst of creativity, just as modern lifeforms were not constructed in one single unlikely event, as the junkyard tornado scenario suggests.

The theory of evolution has been studied and tested extensively by numerous researchers and scientists and is the most scientifically accurate explanation for the origins of complex life.