Origins of life
If we don’t know where we’ve come from, won’t it be much harder to know where we are going?
We’ve all been wising up to Evolution, and with it the ‘Big Bang’, since our early school years, right through till now.
However, have you ever stopped to think about whether this ‘hypothesis’ is correct?
Just a few questions…
Did everything really come from nothing? Did life really come from non-life? Did order really come from chaos?
Really? Take any other scientific experiment, and you will find that each one of those claims is non-scientific, non-observable, and non-reproducible at any laboratory level. When applied to the origins of life, they are a claim to a miracle or at least big-time magic.
I think we would all agree that, according to the natural world now:
Something never comes from nothing; life never comes from non-life; order never comes from disorder; information never comes from inanimate matter.
Natural selection
As amazing and powerful as it is, natural selection is not the whole of Evolution, even if it seems to be promoted that way. It follows on from the origins of life, and does not act until there is life for it to be acting on. It actually is more of a culling force, rather than a creative force. That’s why it is called ‘Microevolution’, and is very much a real and ongoing part of all life that is already living.
The cart is usually put before the horse
Macroevolution should come first, the claimed actual origins of life. After that, should come Microevolution, the true action of natural selection on the origins of life onwards to today.
Another key word in the discussion is mutation. This also is used incorrectly, as if it is a creating force, just like natural selection. However, it should be kept in mind that almost all mutations are negative, in that they cause a loss of genetic information, rather than a gain.
Charles Darwin
In his book, Charles concentrated on the origin of the diversity of life, the “by means of natural selection” part of his book’s title. This is Microevolution, and so is quite misleading, since the book and the great discovery, celebrated and still being spread triumphantly up to today, is supposed to be the “origins of” life.
He was pointedly avoiding the question of the origins of life itself. There are many who think that even now, regarding this, nothing has changed…
Oceanic primordial soup
That’s where the first living organism was supposed to have arisen from. After that, with so much time, and so much good luck, here we are today! A leap of faith is needed!
I suggest a much more believable and scientifically acceptable means of explaining the origins of life is that of Intelligent Design. This involves the God of the Bible, the description in Genesis of that incredibly preserved book, and the evidence fitting it far better than any other hypothesis.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.”
Genesis 1:1 (NIV) (http://www.laridian.com)
Why don’t you check it out? Down the track, I will endeavour to have a Post about it.
Here’s a link to creation.com
Here’s a link to answersingenesis.org
