Origen of Life Requires Intelligence

bart007

Evolutionists have distanced themselves from Abiogenesis. The scientific evidence against it is overwhelming. Life cannot arise from non-life matter by materialistic means:

If an evolutionist can show that a certain combination of off-the-shelf chemicals purported to be from a lifeless planet can combine together to form living systems that will propagate and grow, it would go a long ways to falsifying creationism. The excuse of hiding behind millions of years of evolution is not applicable here because the state is either-or. Either a combination of chemicals is alive or it isn't. There had to be a moment in time where that state of matter changed from non-life to life, and that time had to be instantaneous. That being the case, if materialistic evolution be true, there is no reason why modern chemistry cannot emulate that moment and create life in the test tube. To date they have not done so.

As with so much of evolution, the misinformation on the topics related to the "spontaneous generation of life", also known by Thomas Huxley's term for it "Abiogenesis", have been so often repeated instead of being deleted, especially in school curriculums and textbooks, not to mention sites like these, that science fiction has been, for far too long, masquerading as science.

Let's start with famous "Miller-Urey" experiment and update it from there.

An important pioneer in scientific research on abiogenesis is Alexander I. Oparin. In 1924, he determined what chemicals must be in the earth atmosphere for amino acids to be formed (e.g. methane, hydrogen, and ammonia) and what chemicals ought not to be there that will prohibit the formation of amino acids (e.g. Oxygen). Scientists like A.I. Oparin and J.B.S. Haldane proposed a sequence for life's origins in the 1920's, from complicated molecules in an oily liquid he called coacervate droplets, to the first protocell, to enzymes, to finally genes.

Miller prepared an experiment to observe what complicated molecules' might be produced under Oparin-Haldane's proposed ideal pre-biotic atmosphere. Sure enough, in an assumed atmosphere that was DESIGNED to produce amino acids, it was not at all surprising that amino acids formed:

The Products of the Miller Experiment: Tar 85%
Carboxylic acids not important to life 13.0%
Glycine 1.05%
Alanine 0.85%
Glutamic acid trace
Aspartic acid trace
Valine trace
Leucine trace
Serine trace
Proline trace
Treonine trace

Note: Glycine and Alanine are the two simplest amino acids of the twenty proteinous amino acids found in living creatures.

Miller's results were well received and widely reported by the mass media to be a major confirmation of evolution and of life arising spontaneously without a Creator. It became a valuable weapon in the evolutionists' propaganda arsenal for brain washing and brow beating the public and more so, unwary students, into accepting the legitimacy of Evolution.

The Miller-Urey experiment that produced amino acids under laboratory controlled conditions has been misrepresented in much High school, college and other text books. It is often presented that this experiment demonstrates that amino acids, necessary for life, form naturally in a primitive atmosphere. It is usually further asserted or implied that this experiment demonstrates that abiogenesis is highly probable and that this further demonstrates that evolution (Darwinian) is indeed a fact. Of course such textbooks are nonsense; this experiment demonstrates nothing of the kind. In fact, the Miller-Urey experiment demonstrates the opposite, it revealed the overwhelming difficulties that exist with the view that life can form naturally from non-living chemicals.

The key word above is 'controlled'. Intelligent control is what gets one the outcome they are looking for.

Using a system of glass flasks, Steven Miller attempted to simulate Alexander Oparin's ideal atmospheric conditions. He passed a mixture of H2O, ammonia, methane and hydrogen through an electrical spark discharge. At the bottom of the apparatus was a trap to capture any molecules made by the reaction. This trap prevented whatever chemicals formed from being destroyed by the energy source used to create them. Eventually, Miller was able to produce the aforemntioned mixture, containing the amino acids described above, and the building blocks of proteins.

This was as good as the science ever got for the evolutionists and their hopes for abiogenesis. From now on things get much worse for the Evolutionists. What the public and students have not been told about what science knows concerning the 'origin of life'.

To achieve his results, Miller had to use something that material evolutionists 'KNOW' did not exist in the pre-biotic earth: intelligence and mental "know-how". He drew on decades of knowledge of organic chemistry in setting up his experiment. The proportions of the various gases used, the actual apparatus, the position of the electrodes, the intensity of the spark, and the chemical trap, were all carefully adjusted to create maximum yield from the experiment.

Several attempts by Stanley Miller failed to produce any amino acids or other building blocks of life.

In an effort to make his Oparin atmosphere to mimic actual atmospheric conditions, Miller arranged for his electrical discharge to simulate lightning. After a week of these lightning type electrical discharges in the reaction chamber, the sides of the chamber turned black and the liquid mixture turned a cloudy red. The predominant product was a gummy black substance made up of billions of carbon atoms strung together in what was essentially tar, a common nuisance in organic reactions.

However, no amino acids used by living systems or other building blocks of life, were produced on these first attempts. In his own words, Miller stated "An attempt was made to simulate lightning discharge by building up a large quantity of charge on a condenser until the spark jumped the gap between the electrodes. ... Very few organic compounds were produced and this discharge was not investigated further." from Robert Shapiro: "Origins, A Skeptics Guide ..." P. 103. 1986.

By readjusting and fine tuning his apparatus and using a continuous electrical charge, Stanley Miller eventually obtained the amino acids indicated it above. Even when using the same gas mixture and a continuous electrical discharge, Miller did not obtain any positive results until placing the apparatus in a different order. Shapiro, Ph.D. Chemistry, noted that with respect to the use of "Intelligence" and "Know How:" on the part of the experimenters to achieve the results they desire in "Origin of Life" type experiments:

(P. 102-103)

"another significant factor also influences the products being formed in an experiment of this type, but is less recognized, selection by the experimenter."

"One clear message should emerge from this discussion. A variety of results may be possible from the same general type of experiment. The experimenter, by manipulating apparently unimportant variables, can affect the outcome profoundly. The data that he reports may be valid, but if only these results are communicated, a false impression may arise concerning the universality of the process. This situation was noticed by Creationist writer, Martin Lubenow, who commented: "I am convinced that in every origin of life experiment devised by evolutionists, the intelligence of the experimenter is involved in such a way as to prejudice the experiment.""

The tar created by the experiment tends to fix the amino acids so that they are not that free to Bond [ultra violet rays in the atmosphere would also destroy the amino acids].

Another serious problem observed in the Miller experiment is the amino acids formed were racemates (except the simplest, glycine). That is, each amino acid was produced in equal quantities of Dextrorotary (Right handed Molecules) and Laevorotary (Left handed) molecules. Furthermore, both right and left handed amino acids bond to each other equally well. However, all of life's proteins are made from left-handed amino acid chains. If just a single right handed amino acid molecule binds to a forming three dimensional chain of left handed amino acids, that right handed amino acid is lethal to the formation of the three dimensional chain.

"Without exception, all of Miller's amino acids are completely unsuitable for any type of spontaneous generation of life. And the same applies to all and any randomly formed substances and amino acids that form racemates. This statement is categorical and absolute and cannot be affected by special conditions. This is scientific fact." (1)

All amino acids that form by natural causes alone are racemized. I can walk away now and proclaim abiogenesis has been falsified. Even those found on comets are racemized.

However, here are a few more objections that are relevant, even if it is overkill

Oparin's ideal atmosphere of Methane, Ammonia, Hydrogen, and without Oxygen never existed! We've known for at least the past thirty years that the pre-biotic atmosphere had oxygen that is lethal to the formation of life's building blocks, and it had at best, traces of methane, ammonia, and hydrogen. Ultra-violet let would have destroyed amino acids formed in the atmosphere, and the chemicals of the ocean would have destroyed life's building blocks that ended up there.

Yes there was Carbon Dioxide and nitrogen, but the atmosphere was neutral with about 1% free oxygen, which is an overkill for the amount of oxygen required for preventing the molecules needed in the origin of life scenarios.

See: Clemmey and Badham, "Oxygen in Precanbrian Atmosphere: An Evaluation of the Geological Evidence." Geology, Vol 10 (March 1982)

"It is suggested [from several sources of geological evidence] that from the time of the earliest dated rocks at 3.7 BYA. Earth had an oxygenic atmosphere."

Similarly, "New evidence on evolution of Early Atmosphere and life" Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Nov 1982. Confirms, based on photochemical calculations at Langley, that the earth's atmosphere 3.5 BYA contained CO2, N2, H20 and significant oxygen levels, plus the suns Ultraviolet Radiation was 100,000 times greater than today’s and there was no ozone. The report asked "How could life form is such a hostile environment?"

"Ohmoto (1996) has effectively challenged the concept of earth having a neutral atmosphere. This new analysis puts increasing pressure on all "reducing atmosphere" interpretations of the Earth's early atmosphere. There is no observed trend of reducing -> neutral -> oxidizing. As far as data is concerned, the Earth's atmosphere has always been oxidizing. Theories of abiogenesis which require a reducing atmosphere are pushed further into a realm of speculation supported by theoretical models but not by empirical data."

There are others like Kastings (1993) who favors the warm pond abiogenesis scenario, has argued for a reducing atmosphere, [but one without significant methane]. However, we are faced with a catch 22: if you have free oxygen, even magnitudes less than 1%, origin of life is impossible; and if you have negligible oxygen, then you also have
no ozone and the ultraviolet radiation becomes a major problem in any origin of life scenario under this condition. Kastings points out that it only takes a few hundred to a few thousand years after rain starts falling to wipe out

Along the lines of beating a dead horse, the evolutionists hope for abiogenesis gets even more bad news from science:

When amino acids bond together in pre-biotic experiments, they do so in several different ways using several types of links as the molecular bonds. Only the type of link known as alpha link is used in all proteins from known life. In origin of life experiments, the alpha link is greatly outnumbered by the other types of links. Even if we greatly favor the evolutionist’s possibilities by allowing for every link in a forming 100 unit polypeptide chain to have a 50-50 chance of being an alpha type link, the probability of getting a 100 unit amino acid chain using only alpha links is 10 to the 30th power to one. Sidney Fox had trouble with alpha links bonding in his experiments.

To make life, we need amino acids, sugars, bases, and phosphates. This gives us other catch 22's. You need formaldehyde to make sugars, but formaldehyde fixes amino acids so that they do not react. Methane polymerizes formaldehyde, but must be present to make amino acids. Amino acids plus bases destroys formaldehyde. Calcium and magnesium in our oceans destroy phosphates; you can't get phosphates in oceans. Energy needed to make amino acids also destroys the amino acids.

R. Shapiro, Ph.D. Chemistry, "The Improbability of Pre-biotic Nucleic Acid Synthesis" 14 Origin of Life 565, 1984, relates how experiments like Miller-Urey have very limited significance because of the implausible conditions under which they are conducted:

"Many accounts of the origin of life assume the spontaneous synthesis of a self replicating nucleic acid could take place readily. However, these procedures use pure starting materials, afford poor yields, and are run under conditions that are not compatible with one another. Any nucleic acid components that were formed in the primitive earth would tend to hydrolyze by a number of pathways. Their polarization would be inhibited by the presence of vast numbers of related substances which would react preferentially with them."

The above is much more than enough to convince all reasonable people that abiogenesis is scientifically unfeasible. Louis Pasteur is correct when he gave us the biogenetic law that states that life only comes from life. It takes intelligence and 'know how' to create life. Non-thoughtful processes can not create life because those processes are controlled by the Laws of Physics and Chemistry and they can not place the necessary boundary conditions on the laws of physics and chemistry to form a living being.

Former Atheist and respected intellectual Anthony Flew made the most logical decision in light of the scientific evidence on the Origin of Life, He gave up Atheism and embraced God, the Intelligent Designer. For only Intelligence of an ABLE Being can place the necessary boundary conditions on molecules and energy and the laws of physics and to bring about the specified information and restrictions in physical molcular structures for there to be reproductive life.

Sincerely,

Bart007

P1234567890 · Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:48 pm Post subject:

You don't know what you're talking about. The Miller-Urey experiment produced 13 of the 22 amino acids found in our bodies, as well as sugars, lipids, and some of the building blocks for nucleic acids.

Since the original experiment, which was a first-attempt, scientists have done a *much* better job modeling the primordial Earth, and the results are even more suggestive of abiogenesis than the Miller-Urey experiment.

What you don't seem to understand is that organic molecules are VERY ABUNDANT in the universe. For example, Saturn's moon Titan is covered in them!

You're extremely arrogant if you think that your tinkering around and quote-mining on the internet is going to overthrow good, peer-reviewed science.

You're not a scientist! You completely lack the background knowledge to even begin to address these issues!

What you're doing is like me picking up ancient Sanskrit scrolls and confidently claiming that I have found grammatical mistakes in them.
_________________
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction."
-Blaise Pascal
"...with or without religion, good people can behave well and bad people can do evil; but for good people to do evil -that takes religion..."
-Steven Weinberg
"I would bless my children with your destruction instead."
-Someone who shall remain anonymous.

bart007 · Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 5:52 pm Post subject:

P1234567890 · Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 6:31 pm Post subject:

P1234567890

atoz

P1234567890

I really hate it when people post such massive responses because it makes it hard for me to rebut every single point. This is the same old tired creationist argument against the Miller-Urey experiment. You've clearly just cut-and-pasted it from some website.

None of these hold any water. This is just internet-garbage. Go ahead and try to find any serious criticisms of the experiment in the scientific literature. Good luck with that!

I'm going to start with the first point.

atoz

FFT · Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 12:26 am Post subject:

Eesh P shouldn't you know better by now than to say words like "hate" around atoz?

Plus now it's just going to keep coming up
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.

Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to.

P1234567890 · Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 2:48 am Post subject:

atoz · Posted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 5:33 am Post subject:

The Barbarian · Hamster Joined: 24 Sep 2007 Posts: 86

Miller-Urey has since been vindicated by the presence of abiotic amino acids and peptides in the Murchison meteorite, and the finding that peptides can form spontaneously in water that is on hot volcanic rock.

What your source didn't tell you about three-billion-year-old oxidized rocks is that they are found with the fossils of bacteria. The banded iron formations are layers of reduced iron (only formed in oxygen-depleted places) between layers of oxidzed iron (with many bacterial fossils). The bacteria produced oxygen as a waste, poisoned themsleves, and the deposits became reduced until more bacteria came in and the cycle repeated for a long time, early on.

PrysdieHeer! · Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 4:52 pm Post subject:

Ever seen a bee hive?
It is constructed from hexagons.
It has been mathematically proven that a hexagon is the most efficient shape for storage!
How did the bees know that unless someone told them?
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Prys die Heer!

P1234567890 · Posted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 4:55 pm Post subject:

The Barbarian · Hamster Joined: 24 Sep 2007 Posts: 86

Actually, a Dodecahedron is the most efficient storage shape, but the process by which bees produce honey cells is as complex as they have been able to do.

The most efficient columnar storage is a square in cross-section, but that is much more difficult to make with simple reflexes such as found in insects.

It works well enough, like most evolved things.