Quote:
Originally Posted by FireFly
Yes but abiogenesis in the experiment only worked when they went outside of the known facts about our atmosphere at time. So when going within the confines of our atmosphere, they had zero success. It's like on Mythbusters when they get the result they want, but they have to use bigger explosives than what the myth said. The myth itself still fails.
|
Source? This sounds like a common claim on creationist websites.
And I disagree with the claim that when going with different mixtures of the early earth's atmosphere they had zero success.. what I've read shows that different mixtures of the atmosphere result in MORE amino acids and such, not less.. the only scenario I know of that would result in less would be in a much more oxygen rich atmosphere, but there's little evidence that that was the case 4 billion years ago.
And even if you could completely discount the Miller-Urey experiment, that's only one avenue of research. Do some reading on current research on abiogenesis, there's a great number of places it could have taken place, clay, thermal vents, crystals, many different environments.
More info:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB035.html
Heck, a metorite was found that contained 90 different amino acids (including 19 which are used in life on earth), and many organic compounds are detected in deep space. So even if conditions were never right to form the necessary organic compounds on earth, they still could have come from space.
So I still really don't understand your position here.. there's currently no good theory of abiogenesis, so you are saying what exactly? That God started life and then all the forms of life we see evolved from there? What happens if in 10 years they completely reproduce a natural process which leads to life that looks just like ours?
EDIT: Too slow!
