If Life Suddenly Occurred On Earth Why Is This Process No Longer Happening?
I am kind of comfortable with the idea that seas of petrochemicals like those identified on Europa could somehow end up forming the most basic forms of life i.e. the ingredients are there. I am however fascinated by the problem that if life is an inevitable consequence of the right ingredients and an awful lot of time then why there isn’t more evidence of the creation of life occuring throughout history. Could oil be less the remains of many dead animals or the breeding ground of life itself. Crackpot stuff maybe but I would like to know other peoples opinions.
10 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Well I think you said it, mate. It’s acombination of the right ingredients and a great deal of time. Not to mention, biosynthesis involves the formation of self-replicating populations of proteins/ nucleic acids. We reproduce this phenomena all the time in biochemistry labs. As to why this isn’t observed in nature, well… life is already formed, so if you test a batch of mud and find proteins and nucleic acids, who’s to say whether it formed spontaneously or whether it came from pre-existing sources like soil or microbes? In fact, there are so many microbes and invertebrates covering the face of th eearth that you’d be hard-pressed to take a sample of suitable material and NOT find life in it! The chemical process itself occurs in quantities too small to visibly observe in nature, so as a matter of practicality, it can’t be done.
And as for new breeds of life forming from scratch, see Darwin. It wouldn’t be able to compete with the strains of life that already exist and have evolved to high degrees of efficiency.
If you read more about scientific finding you will find that there are new species of organisms and life found everyday. Mostly in none human populated areas. So yes life is being created right in front of our eyes you just have to open them wide enough to see.
Life is only a temporary condition. It happens everywhere. Stars in the heavens are born, life in the seas are always happening. Why question what is? What is is just temporary, and you make the best of what you are born into.
The first life on earth was an amoeba. A very basic life form . It is still happening and will for eons. Even after people are no longer here, there will be some kind of life form. Just hope it’s not self distuctive like we are.
Life on Earth did not evolve in a ’sea of petrochemicals’
petrochemicals are a product of life.
The primordial seas contained a mixture of simpler organic chemicals that were produced from electrical discharges (lightning) or brought to earth by comets or meteors.
This process took literally billions of years and has been termed ‘chemical evolution’ since it occured before the first living cells appeared.
So it is wrong to say that life appeared suddenly.
It is isn’t happening and it never did!
The idea of abiogenesis is a fairy tale, with no scientific merit whatsover. The Urey-Miller experiment really confirmed just how impossible it is for life to arise from non-life.http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/…
The only reason that people cling to this impossible idea is that the alternative is philosophically (religiously) unaccepteable to them. Namely Creation.
You bring up a good point, but first I’ll address your question directly; the problem is that there are so few parts on Earth that are lifeless. Since you’re looking for lifeless -> life, there’s just not many places to look for it other than a laboratory.
Still, a lot of scientists have focused a lot of efforts on finding a second genesis, whether it’s on Earth, extraterrestrial, or in a lab. The implications would be pretty big in any of those three cases.
Interesting idea re: oil. Although then you’d be describing a second genesis that’s dependent on the first. And independent occurrence would be much more interesting and significant!
New life is occurring.
You are just on an old earth.
It is very difficult to get to a young plannet where it is now evolving.
There is a respected scientific theory that life first came to Earth in comets which could possibly sustain life as they are relatively damp and warm. This theory is called panspermia.
What are the odds that a bunch of ‘pre-life’ materials would be able to sit around for a very long time without being used by something?
maybe it still happens but we don’t realize
the pre-life earth was not the same as it is now, in terms of environment. much more oxygen now, which is actually inhibitory to the formation of the molecules needed for life (oxidation is bad in biochemistry).
finally, if a primitive life forms now, it will probably be eaten in a matter of seconds. the first life forms had no predators. now that’s not the case.
in short, the earth is not as conducive to abiogenesis as it was.