As we’ve seen repeatedly in the pages of this blog, evolutionists love to talk about how their scientists have demonstrated how life had evolved from a non-living slime. There are frequent articles released touting to the unsuspecting public that scientists have started life in the lab. The unspoken message is that we do not need God to make anything, science can explain the origin of all life. However, if you dig into these reports just a little past the headline, you tend to find they are sorely lacking in evidence to support the sensationalist headline. Such a case recently appeared on Fox News claiming NASA scientists demonstrated how life began.
The idea proposed by these NASA scientists, and published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences is that life evolved in the hot vents of the deep sea. To test this hypothesis, the evolutionists performed a specialized experiment. To do this, the scientists took some special chemicals and mixed them with water to approximate the chemistry of deep sea water. Several minerals often found near hot vents were also mixed into the solution. This solution was then heated to approximate the temperatures near the vents and the oxygen removed. Another chemical, iron hydroxide, which the researchers assume was common on the early earth, was then added. An amino acid, alanine, was produced, along with lactase, which is an enzyme used to break down the lactose sugar.
There are all kinds of problems with this experiment. The first one comes from how the Fox reporter wrote it up. The title clearly claims that NASA had recreated the origin of life. It isn’t until the seventh paragraph, below a video, that the reader is informed that NASA had not actually made life. By then most people will have stopped reading, either from boredom or after getting lost in some of the terminologies. This is an incredibly deceptive way to write. I recognize titles are written to draw people to read, but burying the truth seven paragraphs down seems less than accidental.
Beyond the deceptive writing, the experiment itself has issues. To start with, these authors make a ton of assumptions. The first assumption they make is that they know the conditions that existed in the deep ocean in the early earth. There is no way to directly observe this, nor do we have detailed chemical notes from anyone who was there. This assumption alone takes the results of this experiment outside the realms of observable science. However, this isn’t the only assumption. The iron hydroxide is also assumed to be common on the early earth. Once again, we don’t have detailed chemical notes proving that. It’s something they are assuming to demonstrate their dogma.
A final assumption is that there was no oxygen present when life originated. I separated this from the other assumptions because this assumption is the most demonstrably false, and does the most damage. Oxygen tends to oxidize chemicals and destroy the products of chemical reactions which is exactly what it would have done if it had been left in the experiment in any noticeable quantity. Thus assuming little to no oxygen is necessary for this mechanism to work, yet rocks have been found dated to the origin of life era which has a significant oxygen content in them. Something is wrong somewhere.
Even worse, all this experiment did was create a single amino acid and a single enzyme. This didn’t even match the Miller-Urey experiment of the 1960s, which produced more than one amino acid and which has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. Yet NASA expects us to believe they have even come remotely close to replicating the origin of life? That’s a pretty high level of arrogance, even for a government agency. Further, enzymes only work if they have a substrate to attach to so the fact that they produced a form of lactase has absolutely no relevance to the origin of life.
As usual with evolutionary pronouncements, this one is heavily reliant on sensationalist headlines and incredibly lacking in observable data. It did produce an amino acid, but making a cell requires more than one type of amino acid. In fact, it requires hundreds of millions of amino acids, exquisitely folded into proteins, arranged exactly the right way. These scientists are so far away from life, they might as well be in a casket at a cemetery. They haven’t created life, they haven’t created the ingredients for life, they haven’t even created a single protein. All they have is one amino acid to show for thousands if not tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars. I think we should all demand a refund.