by Barry Newton
What we regard as plausible often reveals our ignorance. Years ago a child enthusiastically insisted, “Inside of me are little people. I have an elevator that takes the food down to my stomach where they work on it.”
A gentle smile can spread across our faces at hearing such childish explanations. Yet, our children can be very serious. What we regard as plausible often reveals our ignorance.
To Charles Darwin and Alexander Oparin, the hunch seemed reasonable enough. After all, were not single cell organisms merely small relatively simplistic blobs of protoplasm?
Given enough time, could not a warm little pool concentrating the right building blocks eventually create the spark of life leading to such simple forms of life? What we regard as plausible often reveals our ignorance.
Then came the historic 1950’s with Stanley Miller’s experiment circulating some reductive gases through an apparatus with an electric spark. A few simple amino acids, a small partial sampling of the building blocks of life, had been created!
New York’s Crown Publishers echoed the resulting evolutionists’ sentiments of the day, “There is therefore no longer any doubt that the first stage of the formation of life can occur under the influence of entirely ‘natural’ conditions such as may well have existed early in the earth’s history.”/1
What we regard as plausible often reveals our ignorance.
Sure, it all seemed possible at the time. But then more evidence began to come to light. There is no geologic evidence to support that such a process ever occurred on earth; rather, oxidation in prebiotic rock indicates it never occurred. Time is an enemy of evolution, not a friend because increased time increases opportunity for organic decay. Furthermore, cells and single cell organisms are extremely complex, as well as are built upon a vast storehouse of information which had to come from somewhere.
More recently, in light of the facts honest evolutionists have criticized such popular and naturalistic stories about origins.
“Life arose here on earth from inanimate matter, by some kind of evolutionary process, about four billion years ago. This is not a statement of demonstrable fact, but an assumption almost universally shared by specialists as well as scientists in general. It is not supported by any direct evidence, nor is it likely to be …”/1
As I listen to enthusiastic naturalists who still confidently recount and insist upon their tales about how life began, I hear echoes of a story from long ago. Little men are waiting in a stomach for an elevator to bring down the food. What we regard as plausible often reveals our ignorance.
As far as the east is removed from the west, so too lies the chasmic distance between experimental science and naturalistic explanations for origins. What we regard as plausible often reveals our ignorance.
1/Franklin Harold, The Way of the Cell: Molecules, Organisms and the Origin of Life (Oxford University Press: 2001), p. 236