1
vote

No chance of life by chance

posted September 26, 2006 - 11:52am
No chance of life by chance

In the 1700's many scientists believed that life spontaneously generated from non-living matter (such as raw meat or sewage). In the 1800's, using careful experimentation, Louis Pasteur proved this concept wrong and verified that life only comes from previously existing life. Ironically, many scientists have once again returned to the belief that life came from non-life. . . in spite of the fact that there is no experimental evidence to show how that could have happened. The reason this unsupported belief has returned is that science has been defined as to eliminate the consideration of the only other alternative-the creation of life by an intelligent designer.
Search for the Truth This article is one of many found within Mr. Malone's excellent book, Search for the Truth.

Even the simplest living cell is an incredibly complex machine. It must be capable of detecting malfunctions, repairing itself, and making copies of itself. Man has never succeeded in building a machine capable of these same functions. Yet most scientists accept the belief that life arose from non-life (in spite of the evidence clearly indicating that it did not and could not happen). This incredible belief is as absurd as finding a complex chemical manufacturing facility on Mars and assuming that it built itself.

One classic experiment which is used to support the belief that life "built itself" is an experiment by Stanley Miller in 1953. In this experiment sparks were discharged into an apparatus which was circulating common gases. These gases reacted to form various organic products which were collected and analyzed. The experiment succeeded in producing only a few of the 20 amino acids required by itself. Furthermore, the dozens of major problems with this experiment as an explanation for the formation of life are seldom reported.

For instance, our early atmosphere was assumed to have no oxygen because this would stop amino acid formation. However, with no oxygen, there would be no ozone shield. With no ozone shield, life would also be impossible. Furthermore, oxidized rocks throughout the geologic record indicate that oxygen has always been present.

In addition to this, the same gases which can react to form amino acids undergo known reactions in the presence of sunlight which remove them from the atmosphere. The required gases would not have been around long enough for life to have developed! In addition, a cold trap was used to keep the reaction products from being destroyed as fast as they formed.

The biggest problem is that the amino acids formed in this experiment are always a 50/50 mixture of stereotypes (L and D forms). Stereotypes are like a drawer full of right-hand and left-hand gloves, identical in every way except a mirror image of each other. Life contains only L stereotypes of these randomly produced amino acids. Yet equal proportions of both types are always produced. How could the first cell have selected only L stereotypes from a random, equally reactive mixture? No answer to this has ever been found.

These are just a few of the problems with the fanciful idea that life generated itself. The linking of these randomly produced amino acids into the required proteins is an even more overwhelming impossibility.

No experiment has ever shown that the matter has the ability to come alive. The best explanation for life is still that "life only comes from pre-existing life". As you search for truth, perhaps you should consider the possibility that the source of all life... is GOD.



Comments

the uncommon denomination

Publius -- My problem is with dogma. I didn't say I don't agree with the teachings of Christianity. When I was sixteen and in a mystical phase (having been reading about Tibetan Buddhism, Kabbalism and Bahai), I got the "brilliant" notion that Christianity should be recast as something like Jesus-ism: shed all the accumulated crud of the Church and get back to the impulse that started it all! I was so overcome with this idea -- the irresistible force of Love! -- that I couldn't imagine the rest of the world wouldn't be too. Taking stock of my life now, I notice I've always been a little idealistic. Of course, Thomas Jefferson and a number of others had this "Jesus-ism" notion a long time before I drew my first idealistic breath. Jefferson, incidentally, was a covert Unitarian Universalist and believed that Unitarianism would eventually, inevitably, become the dominant religion of the United States. (He was maybe a bit idealistic too.) While I don't pay dues to any religious organization, UU has my heart. If there's any spiritual movement that embodies that profound truth "None of us know the truth" -- but believes we should get together and try to figure it out -- it is Unitarianism.

Um, yeah, sure...

"Well then...I guess great minds do think alike." Hahaha, yeah, keep on truckin', buddy.

Antonia Dwells

Wow, Ogmern. You are such a

Wow, Ogmern. You are such a nice guy. Thanks for the compliment.

Thank you.

Thank you. That was profound for all of us.

Far out!

"There IS an absolute truth. The truth is, and this may come as a shock to the know-it-alls, that none of us know the truth." -Publius, circa 400BC "Dude! You just blew my mind! You are so profound!" -Ogmern, circa 2006AD

Well then...I guess great

Socrates already made that point.

"The truth is, and this may come as a shock to the know-it-alls, that none of us know the truth."

Antonia Dwells

Lysandra, do you hope for

Lysandra, do you hope for ALL organized religions to dissolve from society, or just Christianity? I'm not a religious person, so don't bother bashing any particular religion if you get upset. I just find it ignorant to hope for the demise of any religion because you disagree with its teachings. For the rest of you, I find your comments amusing. Everyone thinks their own way is right. We can argue all day about truths and scientific facts, and religious facts. We all think we know what's right and wrong about questions such as, how was the universe created? or, why are we here? or, is there a God and which is the right one? You see, the only truths you know are the ones you already believe. It doesn't matter where they came from, whether they are religious or not. If you believe in God, you'll believe He created the Heavens and Earth. If you don't believe in Him, you'll probably take the scientific point of view. There IS an absolute truth. The truth is, and this may come as a shock to the know-it-alls, that none of us know the truth. Not when it comes to creation or whether God exists. To make this argument easier on all of us, just say whether you believe in God as creator, or not. Every other argument beyond that is pointless. NOBODY knows how the universe began. Even scientists can't agree on it.

Li'l Ronnie Howard

"In the Templars defense, after they were embedded in the region for a while, they did a lot of good work bridging cultural and religious gaps witht he locals (Muslims) durring a time of war." Not to mention the good they did in bringing the lethargic and bloated bore "The Da Vinci Code" to the big screen... Not!

Antonia Dwells

Killing in the name of...

Actually, plenty of Christians killed for God openly. It was those extended skirmishes in the middle east where the Church was trying to take back the Holy Land by force. I think they were called The Crusades. Yeah that's it! Specifically the Knights Templar were professional Holy Warriors. They were monks given authority by God to kill. If you disagree you'll have to take it up with the Catholic Church. In the Templars defense, after they were embedded in the region for a while, they did a lot of good work bridging cultural and religious gaps witht he locals (Muslims) durring a time of war. Not to mention the propagation of ancient esoteric knowledge.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • You can use BBCode tags in the text. URLs will automatically be converted to links.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <p> <br> <b> <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <span> <object> <param> <embed> <table> <tr> <td> <div>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

Join Xomba Today

Do you like to write? Would you like to make a little extra money on the side? These people do. Join the Xomba community today.
Become a Member