Re: Article: The Origin of Life

amoritz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Even though the articles about abiogenesis on the talkorigins.org
website efficiently address many issues, the site does not yet describe
an up-to-date, encompassing scenario of how life may have originated.

My article on this important topic may fill that niche at least to a
moderate extent, and possibly might be considered useful for the
talkorigins website:

http://home.earthlink.net/~almoritz/originoflife.htm

I am curious for opinions; for discussion just cut and paste from there
if needed.

Thanks
Al Moritz


Just curious.

Most evolutionists in here and elsewhere claim that there is no reason for life to tend to become more complicated. They claim that it is a process lacking any determinism and that given the lack of any need to "evolve", that organism maintains the status quo ante.

My question is: If a primitive or proto-cell (if there ever were such a thing) could continue going on with just some RNA as its replicating material and a simple semi-permeable fatty acid as an envelope could haver survived in its simple state, why would complexity increase? What would be the impetus?

Secondly, how the heck to you get phospholipids out of nothing in the environment in order to get a proto-cell with a coating? And how likely is it that these molecules (RNA and phospholipids) could have been in proximity to somehow merge and create primitive life?

Thirdly, it seems to almost always boil down to chicken and egg circular argument. RNA can't replicate without proteins, proteins can't be produced with RNA etc., etc.

As I mentioned before in previous posts, it must be very unsatisfying to evolutionists to not be able to replicate life or duplicate the conditions that they believe created it in the first place. Unless this mystery is resolved and some time soon, the ToE is missing one of its most important elements.

How can one say how life evolved if no one has the faintest how it all began?

;)

PS: I'm awaiting and expecting the usual barrage of insults, accusations of being a liar, irrelevant answers by Tweedy, Ronny O taking a hissy fit and popping yet another vein, Wilkins making the obvious complicated by showing off his lexicon of philosophical terms etc., etc.



--
Nicolas


"And, heaving alljawbreakical expressions out of Sare Isaac's universal of specious aristmystic unsaid, A is for Anna like L is for liv."
Finnegans Wake (293)

".... It means that all living things are the product of mindless material forces such as chemical laws, natural selection, and random variation. So God is totally out of the picture, and humans (like everything else) are the accidental product of a purposeless universe. Do you wonder why a lot of people suspect that these claims go far beyond the available evidence?" Phillip E.Johnson, The Church Of Darwin

.

Loading