Laboratory abiogenesis is one of the ultimate goals of experimental biology. The most formidable barrier to create living matter in the laboratory is not the complexity of the cell, rather the absolute requirement for non-equilibrium steady state for all chemical reactions. Current synthetic biology technologies cannot yet produce cells, which harbor chemical systems in non-equilibrium steady-states.
Life depends on strict molecular chirality (L-amino acids, D-carbohydrates), yet the origin of this homochirality remains unexplained by chance, pointing instead to intentional design.
The precise requirements for proteins and nucleic acids, along with the interdependence of DNA, RNA, and protein synthesis, make abiogenesis improbable and instead point to intelligent design by a Creator.
Life’s complexity, from genetic information to cellular repair systems, cannot be explained by random processes or spontaneous biomolecule formation; instead, its precise coordination points to intentional intelligent design.
Chemical space, an immense domain of all possible molecules estimated at 10^24 for just 30 atoms, poses an insurmountable challenge for undirected evolutionary processes to form the precise molecular combinations needed for even a simple protocell, rendering the origin of life through chance highly improbable. Genesis presents a rapid, coordinated creation by a transcendent God who designs fully functioning organisms and ecosystems with dynamic interconnections.
Cell membranes in living cells are asymmetrical lipid bilayers composed of lipids and proteins as well as some carbohydrates. Glycolipids and sphingomyelin are always found in the outer leaflet, and phosphatidylserine in the inner. Transmembrane proteins, like pumps, are precisely oriented and never flip. Flippases maintain lipid asymmetry, vital for cell function and membrane potential. This asymmetry cannot be achieved randomly in labs, it requires preexisting membranes, pointing to a designed origin by a Creator.
DNA’s four-letter alphabet, discovered by Miescher and explained by Watson and Crick, is optimal for life’s functions; alternatives like physical necessity, chance, or evolution lack support, leaving intelligent design as the most plausible explanation for its origin.
During one of my frequent visits to the office of my high school headmaster, his individual tutelage yielded a life lesson that I’ve never forgotten. His exact words were, “You think you’re right!” Of course I thought I was right, wouldn’t anyone who thought they were wrong change their mind and then immediately think they are right? Now that I’m an adult biologist, I still think that I’m right. Inevitably…
Among those who reject the Biblical record of God’s action in creating everything, including all living things, the process of chemical evolution from atoms to the first cell is usually explained something like this: elements reacted with each other spontaneously forming simple molecules. These simple molecules continued to react forming larger and more complex molecules such as the nucleotide building…
The rocks found on the surface of the Earth did not form all at the same time. Geologists schematize this different order of formation using a column, of which the lower layers represent older rocks and top layers represent younger rocks. Archean rocks are the ones at the very bottom of this geologic column, and are therefore interpreted as the oldest rocks. They are often heavily deformed and altered…
A collection of short commentaries on scientific papers published in 2005, covering topics such as debris flows, origin of life, Mesozoic fossil birds, fossil proteins, and dinosaurs. Published in Origins n. 59.
Reaction to the editorial, Chicken Soup, and the article, Recent Developments in Near Eastern Chronology and Radiocarbon Dating, Self-organization and the Origin of Life. Even if biomolecules self-assembled into cellular organization, that would not produce life because life requires non-equilibrium chemical reactions. The editorial by Jim Gibson did not address this point. Correlation of carbon-14 dates with the biblical time scale favors the younger archaeological dates discussed in the article by Michael Hasel.
Life is proposed to have originated by random processes in a chemical soup. The validity of this idea can be tested by looking for life ini cans of chicken soup, which contain all the chemicals needed and so ought to provide an ideal environment for life to originate, if the theory is valid. Published in Origins n. 58.
While Christians may be convinced that design in nature points to a Creator-God, the general scientific community has not been persuaded. Perhaps more scientifically respectable work on intelligent design of the kind done by Behe and Dembski will encourage evolutionary scientists to look beyond purely naturalistic mechanisms to explain the complexity and meaning of life.
The study of living matter is at the center of all current scientific efforts. But strangely, life itself is not the object of much study. Scientists seem to take the existence of life for granted.
This editorial is the Forward for the article, Life: An Evidence of Creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
This brief monograph was written to champion the views of a minority in the scientific community. This minority holds that it is possible to accept this ancient report of Earth's creation at face value — and still be a true scientist. But the main purpose is to go a step further. It will be argued that a close examination of life can lead observers to the logical conclusion that life itself is an actual evidence for creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
Chapter One of the article, Life: An Evidence for Creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
Chapter Two in the article, Life: An Evidence of Creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
Chapter Three in the article, Life: An Evidence for Creation. Published in Origins v. 25, n. 1.
