[Credendovidis]

On the Religious Discussions Board I posted the topic : "Objective Supported Evidence for "God's" existence ?"

In that topic I posted a list of evolution queries that were earlier posted by another member who suggested that this list was proof for the existence of "God" as the evolution as such could not have been taken place without "God".
My topic question there was if any query and/or answer on any subject (the topic refers to some queries on evolution as example) ever be valid as OSE - Objective Supported Evidence - for the existence of "God"?? "
Unfortunately the evolution queries were interfering with the "existence of "God" question, so I split the question : the evolution-abiogenesis part here, and the existence of "God" part there.

In this topic I even go one step further : to start we leave evolution behind us and go to what happened BEFORE evolution : how did life start ? How did first life form? What are the possibilities?

Abiogenesis or the origin of life.

Abiogenesis is the study of how life emerged on earth from inanimate matter.
Science tells us that first life emerged around 3.5 Billion years ago.

Here is a list of possibilities how that may have occured :

Religious

* (First) life was created by the Creator (in Christianity by "God")

Non-religious

* Panspermia (life came from outerspace). This thesis does not answer how first life arose.
* Proteinoid microspheres (a model of how some replicating structures could arise)
* Clay crystals (the first replicators were crystals in clay).
* Emerging hypercycles (metabolism first model : from "soup" to first simple cell).
* The iron-sulfur world (life emerged around submarine hydrothermal vents).
* Polymerization on sheltered organophilic surfaces.
* Something that no one has thought of yet.

Of the above mentioned hypothesi the clay model and the emerging hypercycles model are currently the two most likely models for abiogenesis.

Creationists claim :
The odds first life could develop out of inorganic materials is too small :

Contra-argument :
- The calculation of odds assumes that the protein molecule formed by chance. However, biochemistry is not chance, making the calculated odds meaningless. Biochemistry produces complex products, and the products themselves interact in complex ways. For example, complex organic molecules are observed to form in the conditions that exist in space, and it is possible that they played a role in the formation of the first life.
- The calculation of odds assumes that the protein molecule must take one certain form. However, there are innumerable possible proteins that promote biological activity. Any calculation of odds must take into account all possible molecules (not just proteins) that might function to promote life.
- The calculation of odds assumes the creation of life in its present form. The first life would have been very much simpler.
- The calculation of odds ignores the fact that innumerable trials would have been occurring simultaneously.

Anyone any comments so far?

:)

.

.

[Credendovidis]

Before you react : 3 excellent links to get to the basics...

Please read this LINK : Evolution and the Origins of Life

And this LINK : simple but clear : Origin and History of Life

And this one also : Abiogenesis and the Origin of Life - LINK

:)

.

.