Origin of Life Ideas — Wrong and Wronger

Evolutionary scientists work on the origin of life, but they raise more questions than answers. Their conferences don't seem to help matters a whole lot. Despite evidence against them from both secular and creation science sources, some scientists are clinging tenaciously to a couple of dominant conjectures on abiogenesis (chemical evolution); how life arose on Earth.

Two main concepts on the origin of life are in tatters. Creationists do not need to wreck the ideas when the evolutionists do the work themselves.
Assembled at Atom Smasher
Even the simplest forms of life are extremely complex, and contain a great deal of information so they can function. One bit of speculation involved an "RNA World" of primordial soup, so a special RNA enzyme was produced in a lab. Right, so highly-controlled conditions by people with schooling and specialized equipment, assuming what the world's conditions were like at the beginning, have been able to prove that this one enzyme happened by chance. See "Life from an 'RNA World'?" for more on this idea.

Then we have the hot down south hydrothermal vents in the oceans that would give enough energy to skip enzymes upon which life is dependent. There are some serious problems with the chemistry and thermodynamics with this concept, and fellow evolutionists are taking shots at it. See "Hydrothermal OOL Chemistry Is Unlikely" to learn more.

Any way they try to come up with the origin of life and evolution so they can cut the Creator out of the deal is doomed to failure. They get mighty cranky, ripping each "theory" to shreds. Too bad we can't get popcorn and watch these people slap leather with each other while it happens. To read details of the latest duels, click on "Secularists Battle Over Which Life Theory Is More Wrong".