jay_a2j wrote:To quee:
Now science has said, Life cannot come from non-life. Which is common sense... a rock will never reproduce since it is not living.
Then you trace back all life to its orgin...the very first living thing.
Where did it come from?
The ONLY answer is someting or someone has always existed. And that someone or something must have the power to create (or reproduce).
There must be a God.
The reason there is no "One living thing" is because that's just impossible. Thinking that there's a progenitor comes from your not thinking like a scientist. Life doesn't come from non-life, but it can develop from semi-life.
From my research paper on Creationism v. Evolution
[Daniel C.] Dennett states that there can't have been a single living thing that all others evolved from. He posits that the first single celled organisms developed from “Much simpler, quasi-living things like viruses, but unlike them in not (yet) having any living things to live off parasitically.” (Dennett, 1995, p.156) Chemically, viruses are simply strands of ultra-simple ribonucleic acid (RNA) encased in large protein crystals that self-replicate and exist without any metabolisms to speak of. Since they are simple “lifeforms” having no need to process sugars into energy they basically exist and replicate. A virus doesn't generate its own power. It either comes across the necessary energy to perform repairs or it “succumbs to the Second Law of Thermodynamics and falls apart.” (p.156, para.2) Since crystal formation is a simple enough process to be measured and even watched by people, the attention shifts to the RNA inside the virus. RNA forms when the nucleotides Adenine, Cytosine, Guanine and Uracil bond together by protein fusion into short strands of RNA. Biologists have observed that amino acids can fuse together into bundles that can have some ability to catalyze, or create a reaction, between substances. With a catalytic process and some RNA, we have what can be analogous to “A printing press and a book bindery, but the books would be too short to be good for anything but making more of themselves with a lot of misprints.” (p. 159) The subsequent replications are different from the parent RNA. How does RNA transform into Deoxyribonucleic Acid (DNA), the building blocks of all life as we know it? Single strands of RNA began to drift through the 'primordial ooze' of pre-life and the different nucleotides began to stick to one another and form double-stranded strings of DNA. Opposing building blocks locked into each other by chance, and thus we have life. ID proponents immediately throw this out because things don't 'just happen' for them. Things are all part of a greater whole such as 'God's Great Plan.' In science, however, we see chance happenings on a constant basis. Sometimes a particle strikes an atom and breaks it apart; sometimes it harmlessly bounces off and drifts. Since ID relies on a creator of some kind it cannot utilize nonlinear chronologies. Science, on the other hand, solely on the observable events of a process. Simply put, ID collapses under its own weight when events being questioned are ignored because they don't 'get with the program.'
are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.
