"In 2016, researchers claimed to provide a solution.
They allegedly showed that RNA could be partially replicated without lengthy protein enzymes. (15) ...
... the study contained some major scientific errors and could not be reproduced.
As a result, the research had to be retracted, after which the authors stated,
“In retrospect, we were totally blinded by our belief…
we were not as careful or rigorous as we should have been.” (16)"
Lack of proof of one theory does not construe proof of another theory lacking proof.
“Only an all-wise and omnipotent Creator could have been responsible for the miracle of life’s origins and the diversity and complexity of its amazing systems.”
It’s easy to agree with this.
Doing so, however, does not mean one also must also agree that it all happened ~5700 years ago over a period of six days.
The Bible is a book written by man. Why can’t evolution be part of God’s plan?
But God is a necessary part of the equation. The idea that Nothing existed, and then Nothing exploded (for No Reason) and then the exploding Nothing became all of this, and then the dead matter became alive and filled all the Earth ...
I don't have enough faith to swallow that fairy tale.
The belief that inert elements could just magically combine themselves to create something as complex as even the simplest single cell life form (a bacteria for example) requires much more faith and imagination than any religion ever could.
That’s nothing. The definition of life is still a little fuzzy.
Is a virus alive? How about a prion?
How about polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons? They form in space. Drop them in water, they convert to amino acids.
Some simple questions for all who ‘believe’ in a Godless evolution of the species, specifically to produce humans.
1. Suppose mama and papa chimp (by virtues of a genetic change AT THE MOMENT OF CONCEPTION, to establish a new species in the single cell fertilized egg with a now complete set of chromosomes) give birth to an offspring that is genetically human, meaning that human child of mama chimp has a different NUMBER and structure of chromosomes. Said human grows to the age of sexual maturity, capable of producing gametes with 1/2 that chromosome set (i.e., human sperm/ovum). Science ‘knows’ it is extraordinarily rare (approaching impossible) for organisms with mis-matched chromosomes to mate, get pregnant AND produce a FERTILE offspring [ since the chromosomes from human gamete A don’t line up with chimp BFF B’s gametes ... sperm - meet egg and connect genes from a and b that don’t line up ]
Question 1: HOW was that child even conceived and born?
Question 2: Even if fertile (producing viable human sperm/egg) WHAT did THAT human mate with to produce MORE human offspring (with an identically randomly altered chromosome set)?
Question 3: are you willing to believe that first human, created in a totally random genetic aberration at the moment of conception, became fertile, mated with yet another CHIMP, and somehow produced a HUMAN offspring?
QUESTION 4: OR do you believe that somehow across the randomness of time and geography, TWO *IDENTICAL* random aberrations took place, in the same geography, in the same 20 year period over the eons, and these two humans happened to find each other and produce more humans?
Even if you pshaw the Biblical account, explain to me how TWO fertile humans arose from chimps (or pick lineage of choice) out of random chance, at the same time, in the same geography ... and became the genesis (pun intended) of the human race?
REM: the idea that two chimps mate and produce THE FIRST human offspring, that then mates with a chimp to produce more humans is scientifically preposterous, and mathematically about 5 standard deviations from the possible.
Oh, and don’t try the “they had twins” route, because identical twins from the same fertilized egg are same sex. If you are saying mama chip had fraternal / male-female twins who were both randomly *identical* genetic aberrations, who were fertile together and started the human race ... then explain to me how you passed the 10th grade ;-)
Abiogenesis of any sort, really, is simply magickal thinking, not much more intellectually rigourous than witchdoctory.
Bookmark
http://www.icr.org/how-we-do-research
“ICR holds that the biblical record of primeval history in Genesis 1–11 is factual, historical, and clearly understandable and, therefore, that all things were created and made in six literal days.”
Give it a break, WILL YOU?
YOU MAKE CHRISTIANS LOOK STUPID with these ridiculous arguments about a subject which has NO REAL BEARING on the validity of the Bible, OR its message OR the existence of God. You are a mirror ideological image of atheist biologists who believe evolution proves God and Divine Creation does not exist.
.
Do you believe in Magic ???
.
“All things were made by him: and without him was made nothing that was made.” John 1:3
Math_challenged and philosophically_underdeveloped minds who do not want to be accountable to the Creater God love evolution.
“But he that shall deny me before men, I will also deny him before my Father who is in heaven.” Matt 10:33
At least the origin of the angels is not encumbered by such silliness.
In response to these glaring and obvious issues, some evolutionists have proposed that precursor molecules required for cell life came from extraterrestrial sources such as some type of planetary meteoritic bombardment or even the alleged “seeding” of Earth by space aliens! However, even these creative imaginations only push back the overall problem to how those things originated.
...
Let’s apply the same logic to the Biblical God, which would be much more complicated than the first life on Earth.
bkmk