Origins of Life

Please report broken hyperlinks using the Reply option at the bottom of each page.

[Readers interested in extraterrestrial origins-of-life research can find that information here .]

2019: NASA Experiment Creates Life?

… it’s important to note NASA has not created life itself in [this or any other] experiment… [and w]e don’t have concrete evidence of life elsewhere…

https://www.foxnews.com/science/nasa-was-able-to-recreate-the-origins-of-life-and-the-results-are-shocking

and…

Have Any Scientists Created Life?  Or Something Lifelike?
The type of things that these scientists are creating are really… extremely crude and extremely simply.  In a sense it’s almost laughable to call them cells…

https://www.reasons.org/explore/multimedia/interviews/read/interviews/2018/11/28/have-scientists-created-life-or-something-lifelike

and…

It has become axiomatic that life naturally evolved out of nonliving materials billions of years ago.  Given enough time and the chemical opportunity, living cells self-assemble.  However, the experts on the development of complex molecules from simpler ones, the synthetic chemists, do not know how this process actually occurs.  There are no known pathways to create the components that make up a living cell from nonliving matter.  They have no idea how amino acids…  nucleotides… saccharides… and lipids… can be formed naturally on a prebiotic [E]arth, especially before the formation of biological enzymes, to catalyze many of the requisite chemical reactions…  When Craig Venter’s team created the first synthetic cell, they didn’t assemble a cell from scratch; they replaced a living cell’s DNA with a modified version.  In other words, they replaced the molecular software of an already existing computer.  The hardware already existed.  While… Venter’s efforts [are] one of the most important and promising developments of this century, it is important to point out they did not create life from nonliving materials.  Synthetic chemists may be able to draw a cell’s component target out on paper, but they cannot retrosynthesize it.  And yet [despite the actual scientific evidence] atheists presume life just forms [all by itself]…”

https://pjmedia.com/faith/2017/08/24/caused-life-come-existence/

and…

Life should not exist.  This much we know from chemistry.  In contrast to the ubiquity of life on earth, the lifelessness of other planets makes far better chemical sense…
We synthetic chemists should state the obvious.  The appearance of life on earth is a mystery.  We are nowhere near solving this problem.  The proposals offered thus far to explain life’s origin make no scientific sense.
Beyond our planet, all the others that have been probed are lifeless, a result in accord with our chemical expectations.  The laws of physics and chemistry’s Periodic Table are universal, suggesting that life based upon amino acids, nucleotides, saccharides and lipids is an anomaly.  Life should not exist anywhere in our universe.  Life should not even exist on the surface of the earth.

… &

All of these little pictures of molecules coming together to form the first cell are fallacious, are ridiculous.  [We in th]e origin of life community ha[ve] not been honest.  [We] will write in [our peer-reviewed] papers, [we] will see some small phenomenon and extrapolate what this means in the context of origin of life. And then [we] will work with the press and the press will [exaggerate] it all the more, and you get many many people deceived, thinking that life has been all but made.  All of this is a lie…  We haven’t created life, nowhere close!  What they did is: they took a cell; they took the genome out of that cell; they manufactured a genome that’s similar to it; and they put it in.  That is akin to taking an engine out of a Ford and putting it into a Buick and then saying, ‘Look I created automobiles!‘  No, you just took one piece — and not even the engine, it’s just the computer control box — you took out of one car and put it in another car, that’s what it was like.  But the design of the computer control box you got from other cells.

James Tour, Ph.D., Evolutionary Synthetic Chemist

https://inference-review.com/article/an-open-letter-to-my-colleagues
&
https://pjmedia.com/lifestyle/can-science-explain-the-origin-of-life-revolutionary-video-debunks-materialist-theories/

… &

Evolutionary Chemist James Tour Is Scathing, Hilarious:
Show Me the Chemistry” of Abiogenesis. “It’s Not There.

https://evolutionnews.org/2019/04/chemist-james-tour-is-scathing-hilarious-show-me-the-chemistry-of-abiogensis-its-not-there/

… &

James Tour Responds to Critics of Dallas Lecture

https://evolutionnews.org/2019/05/james-tour-responds-to-critics-of-dallas-lecture/

and…

Origin-of-life researchers [have, for at least 20 years] now acknowledge[d] the virtual impossibility of any natural explanation for life’s origin on Earth, on Mars, on any solar system body, or anywhere among the comets or interstellar clouds.

https://reasons.org/explore/publications/facts-for-faith/read/facts-for-faith/2001/04/01/aliens-from-another-world-getting-here-from-there

and…

The scientific question about the origin of life is still unanswered: it is still one of the great mysteries that science is facing.

http://www.evidenceunseen.com/articles/science-and-scripture/the-origin-of-life/

and…

Pssst!  Don’t tell the creationists, but scientists don’t have a clue how life began.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2011/02/28/pssst-dont-tell-the-creationists-but-scientists-dont-have-a-clue-how-life-began/?print=true

and…

There are so many problems with purely natural explanations for the chemical origin of life on earth that many scientists have already abandoned all hopes that life had a natural origin on earth.

http://www.ideacenter.org/contentmgr/showdetails.php/id/838

[Though some continue to try…]

… the PNAS model lacks credibility for most of the same reasons that other RNA World models do… [because 1)] frequent impact of meteorites in such an early epoch would have sterilized the surface of the Earth and vaporized the oceans… [and 2)] RNA self-replication doesn’t explain the origin of the information necessary to getting natural selection going (let alone life).  Instead, RNA self-replication depends upon preexisting unexplained sources of information… [and 3)] The authors acknowledge that the nucleobases (adenine, cytosine, guanine, uracil, and thymine) essential to RNA and DNA could not have been easily produced on the early Earth.

https://evolutionnews.org/2017/10/an-extraterrestrial-spin-on-the-rna-world/

and…

[I]t is rare for prebiotic simulation studies to fully take the actual conditions of early Earth into account in the experimental design.  It is rarer for origin-of-life investigators to acknowledge this limitation.

https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/the-cells-design/read/the-cells-design/2019/01/16/prebiotic-chemistry-and-the-hand-of-god

———————

The obvious answer to the origin of the highly complex smartphone is that it            created itself ex nihilo.

http://babylonbee.com/news/apple-iphone-evolved-naturally-billions-years-experts-now-believe/

[ASND reminds readers that good satire is simultaneously tragic and comedic, made so by its grounding in reality that is likewise both.]

———————

For the evolutionary paradigm to be true, macroevolution and chemical evolution must be unequivocally established.  And they simply haven’t been.

http://www.reasons.org/articles/evolution-seeing-isnt-believing

———————

The probability that a random sequence of physicochemical events would lead to a bacterium by spontaneous self-organization of biomolecules is negligibly low.

http://www.darwinthenandnow.com/2015/01/genetic-origins-uncoding-evolution/

———————

‘Even the simplest microorganisms known on Earth are breathtakingly complex,’ with the result that the probability of a random series of events of physics and chemistry leading to a bacterium by spontaneous self-organization of biomolecules ‘is negligibly low.’

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/03/self-organizati082531.html

———————

Even though [origin of life] experiments are designed to validate a naturalistic  explanation for life’s origin, they end up demonstrating the necessity of intelligent agency in creating life from inanimate matter.

http://www.reasons.org/articles/how-did-god-create-the-first-life-on-earth

——————–

Early Life Was More Complex than We Thought

http://www.reasons.org/articles/early-life-was-more-complex-than-we-thought

———————

Top Five Problems with Current Origin-of-Life Theories

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/top_five_probl067431.html

———————

More from Thomas Nagel on Neo-Darwinian Evolution and the Chemical Origin of Life

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/10/more_from_thoma065131.html

———————

This [new] approach [to origin-of-life research] is exactly what advocates of ID have been stressing from the beginning.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/accounting_for067461.html

———————

The distributed nature of biological information leads Davies and Walker to introduce a principle that happens to be key to intelligent-design theory: the idea that information is a fundamental, non-physical property that can be expressed in disparate contexts without altering the message.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/assessing_the_a067541.html

———————

New Findings Challenge [Darwinistic] Assumptions About Origins of Life

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/09/130913185848.htm

———————

3.7 Billion-Year-Old Fossils Perplex Origin-of-Life Researchers

http://www.reasons.org/blogs/the-cells-design/science-news-flash–3.7-billion-year-old-fossils-perplex-origin-of-life-researchers

———————

“… all we need is a good sample of soft tissue from a frozen mammoth.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8257223/Mammoth-could-be-reborn-in-four-years.html

[Exactly.  Just like all we needed to generate  life   from   nonlife  was the  right   chemicals .    Piece of cake.]

———————

The Origin of Life: Evolution vs. Design [Full Debate]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CnZ3n8I5b8&feature=share

———————

The Origin of Life: Evolution vs. Design

Fazale Rana vs. Michael Ruse

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CnZ3n8I5b8

———————

“The fact that bacteria can evolve doesn’t mean that evolutionary processes can account for life’s origin and history.”

http://www.reasons.org/articles/a-brief-update-on-the-long-term-evolution-experiment

———————

Sulfur Caused Early Life to Sprout

http://www.reasons.org/articles/sulfur-caused-early-life-to-sprout

———————

Sea Vents Closed as Life-Origin Site

http://www.reasons.org/articles/sea-vents-closed-as-life-origin-site

———————

Could [Planetary] Impacts Jump-Start the Origin of Life?

http://www.reasons.org/articles/could-impacts-jump-start-the-origin-of-life

———————

Want to Leave a Reply?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s