|
Home
Church Community
Statement of
Beliefs
Contact Us Search Our Site
Bible
Study Resource
|
|
|
Basic
Worldview:
102
Atheism vs. Theism
Not Theories, Unsubstantiated Hypotheses 2
Prelude:
"Atheism/Theism" vs. "Science, the Bible, & Creation"
Atheism:
Introduction and Charges
Charge
1, Deduction and Induction
Charge
2, Question 1
Charge
2, Questions 2 and 3
Charge
2, Summary and Question 4
Charges
3 and 4, Definitions
Empirical
Evidence
Scientists
Acting as Mechanisms, Article 1
Scientists
Acting as Mechanisms, Article 2
Scientists
Acting as Mechanisms, Article 3
Occam's
Razor and Conclusions
Footnote
1
Footnote
2 and 3
Proof
of Life
Not
Theories, Unsubstantiated Hypotheses 1
Not
Theories, Unsubstantiated Hypotheses 2
Not
Theories, Unsubstantiated Hypotheses 3
Not
Theories, Unsubstantiated Hypotheses 4
Scientists:
Life on Earth Imported from Outer Space
Atheisms
Circle of Reasons
Is
God a White Crow?
(Continued...)
6) He undertook experiments designed to find out how lightning--reproduced
by repeated electric discharges--might have affected the primitive
earth atmosphere, which Urey believed to be a mixture of hydrogen,
methane, ammonia and water vapor. - American Scientist
article
NOTE: In the famous Miller experiment described in
this quote, Miller made certain assumptions about the contents
of the atmosphere. These assumptions are now admitted to have
been inaccurate, as the following quote explicitly states.
7) Although the primitive atmosphere is no longer believed
to be as rich in hydrogen as once thought by Urey, the discovery
that the Murchison meteorite contains the same amino acids
obtained by Miller, and even in the same relative proportions,
suggests strongly that his results are relevant.- American
Scientist article
NOTE: Despite the inaccuracy of Miller's experimental
conditions, his experiment is still considered relevant as
support for the hypothesis that life can come from unintelligent
forces, including the hypothesis that life came from outer
space. This despite the fact that Miller's experiment was
designed to mimic the atmosphere of primitive earth, not outer
space.
8) But it seems very likely that the first building blocks
of nascent life were provided by amino acids and other small
organic molecules such as are known to form readily in the
laboratory and on celestial bodies. - American Scientist
article
NOTE: Again, in speaking of "likelihood" rather than
"matter of fact" language, the author is admitting to the
speculative nature of this assertion. Once again, no evidence
is offered in support of this claim.
9) The other possibility is that one of these molecules
could itself perform multiple functions. Theorists considering
this possibility started to look seriously at RNA. For one
thing, the molecule's ubiquity in modern cells suggests that
it is a very ancient molecule. - American Scientist
article
NOTE: Again, in speaking of "possibility" rather than
"matter of fact" language, the author is admitting to the
speculative nature of this assertion. Once again, no evidence
is offered in support of this claim. In fact, this speculation
is necessitated by a need to solve the chicken and egg dilemma.
No evidence is offered to support this "possibility."
10) In 1986, Harvard chemist Walter Gilbert coined the
term "RNA world" to designate a hypothetical stage in the
development of life in which "RNA molecules and cofactors
[were] a sufficient set of enzymes to carry out all the chemical
reactions necessary for the first cellular structures." Today
it is almost a matter of dogma that the evolution of life
did include a phase where RNA was the predominant biological
macromolecule. - American Scientist article
NOTE: At this point in the article it is clear that
the author's purpose is to merely speculate as to the chain
of events that might have occurred prior to the arrival of
modern RNA, DNA, and proteins without offering any evidence
that would substantiate such speculation.
The next quote is rather lengthy. It describes in more detail
a series of speculative leaps necessary to explain the origination
of primitive RNA.
11) As certain as many people are that the RNA world was
a crucial phase in life's evolution, it cannot have been the
first. Some form of abiotic chemistry must have existed before
RNA came on the scene. For the purpose of this discussion,
I shall call that earlier phase "protometabolism" to designate
the set of unknown chemical reactions that generated the RNA
world and sustained it throughout its existence (as opposed
to metabolism--the set of reactions, catalyzed by protein
enzymes, that support all living organisms today). By definition,
protometabolism (which could have developed with time) was
in charge until metabolism took over. Several stages may be
distinguished in this transition.
In the first stage, a pathway had to develop that took raw
organic material and turned it into RNA. The first building
blocks of life had to be converted into the constituents of
nucleotides, from which the nucleotides themselves had to
be formed. From there, the nucleotides had to be strung together
to produce the first RNA molecules. Efforts to reproduce these
events in the laboratory have been only partly successful
so far, which is understandable in view of the complexity
of the chemistry involved. On the other hand, it is also surprising
since these must have been sturdy reactions to sustain the
RNA world for a long time. Contrary to what is sometimes intimated,
the idea of a few RNA molecules coming together by some chance
combination of circumstances and henceforth being reproduced
and amplified by replication simply is not tenable. There
could be no replication without a robust chemical underpinning
continuing to provide the necessary materials and energy.
The development of RNA replication must have been the second
stage in the evolution of the RNA world. The problem is not
as simple as might appear at first glance. Attempts at
engineering--with considerably more foresight and technical
support than the prebiotic world could have enjoyed--an RNA
molecule capable of catalyzing RNA replication have failed
so far.
With the advent of RNA replication, Darwinian evolution
was possible for the first time. - American Scientist
article
NOTE: In this series of paragraphs and the following
series of paragraphs author lays out in some detail what he
believes is a necessary chain of stages in the development
of primitive RNA. The author's description is nothing more
than his own unsubstantiated speculations as to what must
have or might have happened for life to originate from unintelligent
causes. He readily admits there is no evidence to support
this hypothetical model and that attempts to verify these
claims "have failed so far." Despite the fact that scientists
have "failed so far" to substantiate these hypotheses experimentally,
the author still concludes that success is inevitable and
offers that inevitable success as evidence that Darwinian
evolution is "for the first time" possible. It would seem
that scientifically speaking, since these hypotheses have
so far failed the experimental stage, Darwinian evolution
is not yet possible.
Sources
http://www.americanscientist.org/articles/95articles/cdeduve.html
September-October 1995
The Beginnings of Life on Earth
by Christian de Duve
http://www.discover.com/archive/index.html
First Cell
By Carl Zimmer
|
|
|
|
|
|