Anyone who has read this blog over the years will know how many times I've taken up the issue of the origin of life on Earth, a topic about which none of us really knows how it happened because the one and only source of that information is as of now and, as any rationally coherent and honest guess, will forever remain will be entirely unknown to us. So we never will know how life arose in the actual and only way it did on Earth.
But that doesn't mean that you can't have fun with it. I don't mean the kind of fun that abiogenesists and others do, those who endlessly lie with science that they are getting closer to knowing how life arose on the Early Earth more than 3.5+ billion (or so we have some reason to believe) years ago. I mean the fun that can be poked at those guys whose primary motivation, in most cases, seems to have little to do with actually finding out how that happened, something which any rational person who honestly thinks about the problem they feign to be addressing will know they aren't doing, their motive isn't to find the origin of life, their motive is getting rid of God, the Creator of life. Something which, while they might dupe dopes and other dishonest people they've done, they can't rationally use science to do. For a start, one thing I've repeatedly enjoyed pointing out, any experiments they do to "create life" will have only proven that intelligent intent, agency, DESIGN was necessary for them to do what they did, thus defeating their intention to prove that life didn't require intelligent design.
I'm addressing this again because among those last spams, before I turned off comments altogether, was the typical whining because I said "intelligent design" while not able to be confirmed through science was more supported by the evidence available than the materialist-atheist-scientistic claims about life coming into being by random chance. I say that for any number of reasons, not least of which is to have fun thinking about how stupid their claims are.
The jillions of universes invented, with stupendous and entirely ironic shortsightedness by atheists scared by the gargantuan improbability of our unverse their colleagues were asserting ARE IN NO WAY IN EVIDENCE. They are not demonstrated, they are not observed, they are not reliably testable. So that entire realm of atheist dodge is no more than wishful thinking to their ends.
It's short sighted because it doesn't get rid of the possibility or even the "necessity" of a Creator, an infinite Creator could choose to create an infinity of universes the necessity of which would no more need to be known to us than the purpose of the vast stretches of our own universe, the existence of which was one of the old atheist chestnuts my dear old Latin teacher tried to pull on me once. He didn't try it after I answered him. The fact is that the Bible, itself, says that we are not going to understand the mind of God, any atheist assertion that is based in claiming that God couldn't possibly have a reason for doing something we don't understand fails on that basis. The fact is the universe science describes at any moment of time could be a universe God created, the reason for which we should not only expect to not understand, we cannot possibly understand the mind of God.
“My thoughts,” says the Lord, “are not like yours,
and my ways are different from yours.
As high as the heavens are above the earth,
so high are my ways and thoughts above yours.
Isaiah 55:89
In the known limits of time and estimated probabilities of all of the many, complex events:
1. materials coming together and joining into very complex structures,
2. unprecedented events which would have had to have happened in a theorized first organism.
a. metabolism, bodily regulation, absorption or gathering of nutrients, solar energy (or other energy), etc.
b. generation of complex molecules within the organism to maintain its own metabolism, bodily regulation, absorption or gathering of nutrients, solar or other energy, etc. and,
c. leading to the totally unprecedented and, according to atheist desideratum, entirely purposeless reproduction without there being any teleological motivation.
1. the requisite numbers of such complex molecular structures as made the first organisms, at least twice as many as needed to make one of them, the unprecedented biology of that first organism forming and accumulating those.
2. That accumulation of materials, somehow, starting the process that would, continually, lead to who knows how many discrete actions that would. And let's understand one thing that is so often unstated about the matter of reproduction, reproduction of even the simplest living organisms is not a single event but a series of continuous events which happen in a specific order, ALL OF WHICH HAVE TO HAPPEN THE RIGHT WAY OR IT DOESN'T HAPPEN.
3. result in the splitting (presumably) of the original organism into two living, viable organisms, something that couldn't have happened by trial and error and which must have happened successfully THE FIRST TIME in order for it to leave, not only one living organism, but two, which would have (presumably) had the same extraordinarily complex molecular chemistry and structures which would allow everything from metabolism, regulation of body chemistry, and reproduction present in the two organisms.
4. had some mechanism to allow the mutant versions of that organism to, as well, live and reproduce its kind in a string of evolution that eventually led to the stupendous diversity of life that is known to have similar biological traits - all of those species which are known to us today and in the lost past.
5. And I haven't even brought into it things like my favorite problem of the containing membrane in which all of this would almost certainly have had to happen forming by random chance events, just right, for ALL OF THESE MANY THINGS it to happen perfectly the very first time.
The atheists ask us to believe all of that happened by random chance - not only in the 4 or so billion years of life on Earth but during the estimated life of the Earth, maybe not even a billion years into it, at the time that life first appeared on Earth. Or, if you want to push it, in the 13.77 ± 0.059 billion years (apparently the latest estimate pushed by U.S. governmental agencies), something which I doubt could have happened by chance within a plausible realm of probability, at least none which anyone who was honest and informed would believe.
I have to admit I do find thinking about this problem is a pleasure for me because every single time I've been led by atheist objections to something I've said about it, THE MORE OBVIOUS IT IS THAT THE TYPICAL ATHEIST-MATERIALIST-SCIENTISTIC ASSERTIONS ABOUT IT ARE BLATANT AND COMPLETELY OBVIOUS BULLSHIT. Starting with the first time I got into it at a Jeffrey Epstein - Ghislaine Maxwell funded Science Blog, one of a Harvard Anthropologist dolt who didn't like what I'd said at Sean Carroll's blog, every single time I've looked at their claims the more obviously dishonest, transparently ideological and anti-scientific their claims are.
It's short sighted because it doesn't get rid of the possibility or even the "necessity" of a Creator, an infinite Creator could choose to create an infinity of universes the necessity of which would no more need to be known to us than the purpose of the vast stretches of our own universe, the existence of which was one of the old atheist chestnuts my dear old Latin teacher tried to pull on me once. He didn't try it after I answered him. The fact is that the Bible, itself, says that we are not going to understand the mind of God, any atheist assertion that is based in claiming that God couldn't possibly have a reason for doing something we don't understand fails on that basis. The fact is the universe science describes at any moment of time could be a universe God created, the reason for which we should not only expect to not understand, we cannot possibly understand the mind of God.
“My thoughts,” says the Lord, “are not like yours,
and my ways are different from yours.
As high as the heavens are above the earth,
so high are my ways and thoughts above yours.
Isaiah 55:89
Like it or not, that is an absolute barrier to using anything science can honestly tell us about the universe from being a successful argument against God having done exactly what scientists have claimed they have found in the universe. It might persuade the ignorant, the naive, those prone to ideological dishonesty and their ilk, those predisposed to that point of view. It can't impress those who are rigorous in their thinking.
