Evolutionary Explanations for the Creation of Life – Naturalism or Supernaturalism?

There is absolutely NO evidence that life arose from non-life. Evolutionists have no idea how it could have occurred and the most revealing proof is that there is no ONE agreed-upon hypothesis that has been proposed.

Another indicator of ignorance is the existence of Harvard University’s ‘Origins of Life in the Universe Initiative.’ Its purpose is to attempt to prove that life arose spontaneously without God, and its long term strategy includes, “adding faculty members and a collection of multi-million dollars facilities.”
If it’s so easy to “reduce this to a very simple series of logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention," why does it appear that they’re planning on a lengthy endeavor by adding future facilities?
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4188/is_20050815/ai_n14882732/print

Realizing that this initiative might be seen as too incriminating, professor of astronomy at Harvard University, Dimitar Sasselov, attempted to do a little damage control:
“So we are just trying to widen our studies on the origins of life in the universe. The 's' is very important here. It’s not the 'origin' of life, but possible pathways to life. And 'in the universe' is important as well. Not simply on the Earth, but generally, on any planet, given any of the conditions that we know exist in the observable universe.”
http://www.astrobio.net/news/article1894.html

Spontaneous or purposeful?

Because random ‘self-assembly’ of life from non-life is a stretch, the word ‘spontaneous’ was replaced with the more seemingly scientific term called ‘abiogenesis.’ Instead of an instant assembly of inorganic materials, abiogenesis supposedly gives way to a slower piecemeal brew that still miraculously assembles itself into a self-sustaining single cell organism:
“Instead of life arising from non-life on a regular and observable basis, abiogenesis proposes life arising from non-life at some particular point in the ancient, unobservable past. But abiogenesis differs from spontaneous generation in another important way. While spontaneous generation proposed the emergence of a complete, complex cell or organism from organic molecules in one huge jump, abiogenesis draws from gradualism, where the original life forms were much simpler than modern cells and only gradually evolved their present-day form of complexity. Thus, abiogenesis not only places the spontaneous generation of life far in the past, but the life that is generated was supposedly much simpler, thus easier to generate spontaneously.”
http://www.iscid.org/encyclopedia/Abiogenesis

Every hypothesis of abiogenesis has its own flavor and some even claim that extraterrestrial particles of interstellar dust caused life on earth to begin:
http://www.astrobio.net/news/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=
article&sid=2434&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0

Other speculations:
http://www.physorg.com/news115988029.html
http://www.colorado.edu/news/releases/2007/463.html
http://www.uga.edu/news/artman/publish/071030_DNA.shtml
http://www.physorg.com/news100533246.htm
http://www.hhmi.org/news/szostak4.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/originoflife.html

Is random self-assembly really more probable than modern technology and human intelligence?

When evolutionists are challenged as to why scientists can’t create life from non-life today, they claim that the conditions in which life began millions of years ago are too complex to assess:
“Conditions today are different from conditions in the past in two important ways: First, there was little or no molecular oxygen in the atmosphere or oceans when life first appeared. Free oxygen is reactive and would likely have interfered with the formation of complex organic molecules. More importantly, there was no life around before life appeared. The life that is around today would scavenge and eat any complex molecules before they could turn into anything approaching new life.”
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB020.html

REVIEW HOW ABIOGENESIS HOLDS UP WHEN USING THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD OF TESTING A HYPOTHESIS:

Make observations.
Form a testable, unifying hypothesis to explain these observations.
“By 'testable,' we mean the predictions must include examples of what is likely be observed if the hypothesis is true and of what is unlikely to be observed if the hypothesis is true. A hypothesis that can explain all possible data equally well is not testable, nor is it scientific. A good scientific hypothesis must rule out some conceivable possibilities, at least in principle.”
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sciproof.html
Deduce predictions from the hypothesis.
Search for confirmations of the predictions; if the predictions are contradicted by empirical observation, go back to step (2).
(From: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sciproof.html)

Results:
Using the standards established by the Scientific Method listed above, each evolutionary explanation for Abiogenesis has:

NO observations of occurrence;
NO defining hypotheses that allow for testing;
NO exclusive predictions that allow for deductions;
No confirmations because there are NO exclusive predictions.

REVIEW WHAT IS CONSIDERED AS NATURALISTIC BY EVOLUTIONARY STANDARDS:

“In science, explanations must be based on naturally occurring phenomena. Natural causes are, in principle, reproducible and therefore can be checked independently by others.”
“Science, Evolution, and Creationism,” 2008, National Academy of Sciences (NAS), The National Academies Press, third edition, page 10.
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11876

Using the standards above:

Are there any evolutionary explanations for the evolution of life from non-life a “naturally occurring phenomena” within know scientific information, laws, and principles?
Can any be “reproducible and therefore can be checked independently by others”?

Results:
Since the answer is “no,” all existing evolutionary explanations for the evolution of life from non-life MUST be given the correct status of being supernatural, i.e. something attributed to a power that seems to violate or go beyond natural forces.

For more information, refer to:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v18/i2/abiogenesis.asp
http://www.trueorigin.org/originoflife.asp



Join Our Email List Email: