In my previous post entitled "Evolution Examined", I discussed why it is not possible for life to have evolved from chemical reactions on land. Many scientists are now saying that perhaps we evolved in water instead since they understand that an oxegenated atmosphere cannot support the chemical reactions neccessary to create amino acids, which are the building blocks for life. You may ask then, "Why not the Water?" Let's take a little venture back to Chemistry 101 to find our answer.
Hydrolosis is the process by which water decomposes molecules, specifically amino acid bonds. As soon as amino acids form, water molecules (which by the way contain an element of oxygen...remember h20...two elements of hydrogen, one element of oxygen?) break the amino acid bonds a part. As I said before, the element of oxygen found in water will force itself between the amino acid bonds and break the amino acids a part. If we remember some basic biology, we know that amino acids are the building blocks for life and without them, we cannot have a living species. So, if life cannot form on land or in the water through natural chemical processes, how the heck did life get to this planet?
You could ask William Bonner who is an organic chemist from Stanford University and who is also the world's leading homochiral researcher (more about what that is in another post). His explanation is simply this: "Terrestrial explanations are important and nonviable." Wait a second; I thought we were talking about science here, not science fiction!!! Well, if you believe in the impossible processes of chemical evolution, you just may have no other choice than to accept that aliens are responsible for the development of life on earth! I choose to rather believe in real science and have the faith that there is a Creator God who fashioned the universe with a definite purpose! I would rather stay away from the idea that I am evolved from random chance over time (the evolutionist view) but rather that we are all created with purpose and in the image of God (creationist view).
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
Keep it up! There are so many people out there arguing for evolution without knowing the facts; they've been brainwashed into accepting it as the only possible scientific explanation for our existance. I'm with you, God must have created us, because there is no other way that we could have come into existance.
I have not read your previous blog yet. I seem to be going backwards on them. However, most scientists have ALWAYS said that the most likely place for the origin of life is water. It has been only recently with the discovery of extremophile bacteria (bacteria that live and thrive in environments that we would consider extreme) have we even entertained the idea that life may have evolved elsewhere.
Two of the more exotic possibilities include Mars and deep within the surface of the earth. Almost everyone is aware of the claim a few years back that microfossils of life had been found on a meteorite that had apparently originated on Mars. The idea is that Mars would have cooled significantly earlier than earth and life could have originated there. A large impact then could have blown life-containing rock into space and some of that could have seeded our earth with life by landing here. Intriguing ... but unfortunately the evidence that what the NASA group saw was actually microfossils is not convincing. On the other hand with more recent findings indicating that Mars did have flowing water, I don't think anybody has ruled this possibility out.
Another intriguing possibility is that life evolved deep underground. We have found extremophile bacteria miles below the surface of the earth in deep drill holes. Did they originate down there or are they the products of evolution from ancestors who occupied a more "normal" environment?
Er ... not quite. HydrolYsis is simply a chemical reaction. Water does split a molecule but it can be any of a number of molecules.
Er ... definitely no. Amino acids are generally stable in water. The insides of our cells are aqueous and amino acids are made there. Our blood stream is mainly aqueous and amino acids are transported there. They do not break down easily. Neiter do proteins which is the macromolecule that amino acids make up.
No it won't.
Amino acids are the basic building blocks of PROTEINS. Proteins act as enzymes and direct biochemical pathways. Without biochemical pathways we cannot have life, or at least ... life as we know it. Who knows what is possible should life originate somewhere else in a different manner than it seems to have done here on earth.
(1) Nobody working in the field of origin of life research would agree with you that life could not have originated on land or water.
(2) But I have already mentioned two other places that some people postulate life may have evolved. Furthermore, as I pointed out in another reply we know that amino acids are produced in outer space. Therefore one cannot even rule out outer space. Admittedly it will take a lot of evidence to convince me that it actually did originate there.
How do you know a creationist is lying ... he quotes an evolutionist.
When I engage a creationist in a more formal debate I insist that they NOT quote anybody without having read the original material and understood it. You don't know what you are talking about.
(1) Again, I follow the literature on origin of life research ... not as closely as I once did, but pretty closely. I have never heard of Willam Bonner.
(2) Just because one scientist may something is not viable doesn't mean that is the scientific consensus or even that it is right. What evidence does he present to make his case that other scenarios are not viable?
(3) What evidence does he present that his scenario is viable?
The evidence is what is important, not who said it. I have already responded to what I think Bonner probably meant in a response to your other blog. I wont repeat it here. But, there IS evidence in his support.
I don't think that he was referring to aliens. I think you don't have a clue to what he was referring to because you read his little quote on a creationist website and they didn't even try to tell you. That doesn't speak well of them, and your having repeated it here doesn't speak well of you.