Abiogenesis

Abiogenesis – Making Life from Non Life.

Abiogenesis; (a hypothetical organic phenomenon by which living organisms are created from nonliving matter)

http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=hypothesis

Hypothesis:

Abiogenesis is more closer to hypothesis than real scientific proof.

A Hypothesis is;

a tentative insight into the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; “a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory”; “he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in …
guess: a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence.http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=hypothesis

Introduction:

Life coming from Non Life is the only belief system by which Atheism can exist. Since Atheists do not believe that God causes life, the only other option is that Nature caused Life. And this is why the Abiogenesis argument is put forward.

Atheists therefore have 2 understandings in regard to Abiogenesis;

1 – Life Originated on Planet Earth.
2 – Life Originated from out of Space, and landed on Earth when a Meteor landed on Earth.

In both cases – the question which needs to be answered is; How did Life come from Non Life?

Go to Top^

Miller’s Study:

The famous study which is always used to argue in favour of life coming from non life [Abiogenesis] is; Miller’s Study:

In 1953 the Miller-Urey experiment was conducted that attempted to mimic the conditions on earth during the time life originated. They mixed water and hydrogen as well as methane and ammonia. Then they used electrodes to emit electrical charges into the mixture. After several days of continuously charging the mixture with sparks, they managed to get about 2% of amino acids.

Miller tried to imitate the early Earths atmosphere, – a small amount [2%] of Amino acids (which are building blocks for proteins, which are building blocks for life) were produced.

Criticism:

1 – But harmful substances were also produced in the experiment; Tar and Carboxylic acids.*

* Tar is harmful to organic matter [amino acids are organic] because; Tar contains hosts of poly nuclear aromatics, toxic heavy metals, naphthenic acids, benzene and fused benzenoid type materials which are declared toxic by EPA-USA . Tar is a carcinogen which can damage genes (and therefore could destroy any DNA produced in the early atmosphere.) Also Tar can coat organic matter stopping light and water getting to the organic matter.(like the carboxy groups above -) therefore stopping life.

Harmful carboxylic acids are dangerous for amino acids because they react with the amino groups on the amino acids. So amino acids react with the Carboxylic acids, forming it into amides and amino carboxylates. So in this case, the reacted amino acids can’t be used to form into proteins, since they’ve reacted and become amides and amino carboxylates.

2 – Amino acids are the building blocks of life – but the experiment doesn’t show how they formed into Proteins.

What are amino acids? Amino acids are the building blocks of proteins , which if formed together in the right way – will form proteins, and proteins form into tissues, and tissues can become muscles, muscles wrap around bone and nerves to become organs (i.e. an arm, heart etc.), and lots of functioning/working organs become an organism (a being i.e. an Animal.)

So one question which we already get in our mind is that if amino acids do form through the experiment, how do they later on form in the correct way to become useful proteins? The experiment doesn’t answer that question. So already, this experiment does not explain how the building blocks for life [Proteins] originate. You are justified to deny abiogenesis and are not going against science if you do so, because science has not proved its reality yet.

3 – The Cell Membrane – a ‘Closed System’ ;

If the Cell membrane (which has been produced by scientists now) was produced in the early Earth atmosphere – how would they [any; DNA & Protein Organelles] enter inside the cell membrane (a Lipid [Fat] bilayer). Since it is just made up of Fat (Lipids), and has no receptors to allow anything (i.e. organelles, DNA) to enter it? And even if there was somehow a way for them entering the Cell membrane, what would prevent anything harmful [i.e. Tar and Carboxylic acids or any other Toxins] from entering it and destroying the precious DNA & Cell organelles?

4 – Electrodes & Lightning – Hitting the Same spot for a Week?;

Electrodes were placed in the original mixture in Miller’s Study to take the place of lightning which would charge the mixture for some days continuously. But the reality is that Lightning does not hit the same spot on Earth continuously for a whole week [the experiment lasted for a week]. So this questions the experiments validity, since real life is not really like the how Miller carried out the experiment.

5 – Time doesn’t matter if the right conditions are met for it to take place ;

If Abiogenesis can occur within a certain environment with the right conditions, but it doesn’t occur – the amount of time given for it to occur doesn’t matter (even if it’s millions of years.) The fact that DNA and Proteins were not produced in Miller’s study – when the right conditions were set for it – questions the validity of if it could ever really occur.

6 – Something Suspicious…

Millers experiment did NOT contain Oxygen:

If there was Oxygen in the early Earth Atmosphere – No DNA or Proteins would be formed. So Miller did not add Oxygen in his experiments;

- Since Oxidization# would destroy the Peptide bonds of Proteins & DNA.
- These Peptide bonds which break through Oxidization would have the role of connecting Amino acids to form into Proteins or DNA ).

i.e. Amino Acid 1 -+- Amino Acid 2 -+- Amino Acid 3… = Protein + Protein… = Cell Organelle.

[ -+- ( Peptide Bond)] Oxidization would destroy this Peptide bond. #

However, if there was no Oxygen – there would be no Protective Ozone layer* on the Earth.

ALOT of Ammonium & No Oxygen added by Miller:

*No protective Ozone Layer [made of Oxygen] on Earth means that the Sun’s harmful UV [UltraViolet] Rays would destroy Ammonium. And a huge quantity of Ammonium was added by Miller in his experiment (since Ammonium was an ingredient required in the experiment to produce Amino acids.)

How can there be a huge Quantity of Ammonium left till the end of the experiment in Millers experiment if the UltraViolet rays of the Sun would destroy it in the early Earth atmosphere?

Conclusion:

So either there was oxygen (which forms an Ozone layer to protect the earth from harmful rays from the sun – which would in turn protect the Ammonium ) in the early atmosphere. In this case, oxidation would occur and any DNA produced would be destroyed.

Or there was no Ozone & no oxidation , which means no protection against harmful UV rays which would destroy ammonia [which is a major component in the mixture produced by Miller of the earths early atmosphere]. So if this ammonia is to be destroyed [without no Ozone] in reality, how did it remain there within the experiment? Isn’t that something to think or be suspicious about?

———
# Research showed that the sun’s ultraviolet rays rapidly destroy ammonia in an oxygen-free atmosphere. [ Critical Perspectives on World Climate pp.84 ] http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=g…esult#PPA85,M1

“Oxidation of DNA can result in damage to all four bases and deoxyribose (a sugar which is a major component/part of DNA). ” http://www.ebmonline.org/cgi/reprint/222/3/246.pdf

Scientists ‘Creating Life’:

There has been many Research done by Scientists in which claims have been made that they have ‘created life’.
But is this really true? Here are some points for people to think about (and others can use in debate if necessary);

1 – Scientists are not ‘Creators’ of life, because they did not originate/create Matter.

2 – Have the Scientists really created life, or have they Manipulated already existing living things?

3 – Scientists are Designing life, which does not necessarily support the Atheist premise. Since the Atheist premise is that life formed by itself, not through a Designer.

4 – If Scientists produce Viruses or Bacteria, is it really Creation if they are borrowing parts from other already existing and Living beings?

5 – If Scientists have made Genomes [DNA] by themselves, is that really Creation? Did they make the Genome from scratch (i.e. nothing), or did their knowledge of Intelligent Genome Mapping borrowed from already existing Life?

6 – If Scientists do produce Bacteria, it is debatable whether Bacteria actually qualifies as ‘Life’. It does meet the technical criteria, but you cannot say that bacteria are ‘living’ a life more than a robot does.

[Similarly, from a religious perspective; Bacteria does not have a 'Soul'. Only Animals and Humans do. So the challenge would be for the Scientist to create a living Animal.]

Conclusion:

1 – Abiogenesis is a Hypothesis – guess: a message expressing an opinion based on incomplete evidence.

2 – Main Lesson: We learn that – as of today – there is No Known Scientific Process by which Abiogenesis can occur.

3 – Millers Study (no matter how famous it is) – hardly gained any positive results, & contained alot of errors, some things were even suspicious in his experiment, which questions its validity.

4 – Headlines which say Scientists have ‘Created Life’ are misleading, since Scientists; Manipulate already existing life, & copy [the design] of already existing Life – & this is NOT creation.