I am not a theist, I follow modern satanism (basically atheism) with some deeper philosophical and psychological beliefs than the traditional atheist. One of the few problems I have with atheism is…
How did life manage to come around out of an abiotic enviornment? At first, scientists saw that amino acids will form in an abiotic enviornment under reasonably usual conditions, and this is true. One problem though, is that amino acids from in LH and RH pairs, and it is only the LH that form proteins. The second problem is that the LH pairs do not come together unprovoked, the opposite is true; they will move further away from eachother. It could be said that given enough time, they would eventually come together to form a protein, but in a lab enviornment, with many more amino acids than you would expect to form spontaneously in an abiotic enviornment, they lose their integrity long before they come together to form any semblence of protein.
Scientists have observed this, and now theorized that it was not proteins, but RNA that came about first, which then synthesized proteins to make life possible. The problem with this, however, is that nucleotides (building blocks of RNA) act similar to amino acids, and do not come together of their own accord. It would seem that there is something missing that would force these bits of matter to come together and give us the building blocks of life.
If by some chance, protein or RNA would form in abiotic conditions in a lab enviornment, it would go to waste. You see, proteins break down fairly rapidly, and one would need app. 250 proteins for BASIC cell function. Now, we know that in order for a cell to be viable it would have to display all of the characteristics of metabolism (and not acquire them slowly over millions of years, the only one that may be the exception is movement, and even then that’s only exterior movement) so one would require a great deal more proteins to claim to produce viable life.
We must now ask ourselves, if 100 years from now, our most brilliant scientist, with the help of all of the post modern technology, manages to create viable life in a lab enviornment… does that really disprove intelligent design? And if we were to assume that life was seeded on earth, and began elsewhere, well… you really don’t avoid the question of how life began just by saying it didn’t happen here, there are just as many, if not more problems with that theory. (i.e. how did it survive solar winds and other massive exposures to radiation? how did it survive in a vacuum with no food? how did it aviod being destroyed by rogue meteors and asteroids while traveling at the great speeds it would take to get here?
All valid and puzzling questions that I hope get answered. Please also link your reference material so i can do some individual research on the topic, beyond what i have done.
