One of the big questions in evolution (well, more like, that sets the stage for evolution) is the origin of life. Scientists have been pretty much stumped on this one, although there have been some interesting experiments in the past that have given us some possible answers, but now someone seems to have developed a theoretical framework for the beginnings:
The article points out that creationists are fond of citing the Second Law of Thermodynamics as a refutation of non-divine theories of the origin of life, but they misrepresent the Second Law:
That's the key point, and one that creationists try very hard to ignore: the Earth is not a closed system -- it gets energy from an outside source -- the sun -- and there are, and have been, injections of matter from outside --meteors and a more or less constant rain of interstellar dust.
It's an interesting article, and worth reading.
By the way, if you're interested in what the first living organisms were like, here's an interesting article.
Darwin also didn’t have anything to say about how life got started in the first place — which still leaves a mighty big role for God to play, for those who are so inclined. But that could be about to change, and things could get a whole lot worse for creationists because of Jeremy England, a young MIT professor who’s proposed a theory, based in thermodynamics, showing that the emergence of life was not accidental, but necessary. “[U]nder certain conditions, matter inexorably acquires the key physical attribute associated with life,” he was quoted as saying in an article in Quanta magazine early in 2014, that’s since been republished by Scientific American and, more recently, by Business Insider. In essence, he’s saying, life itself evolved out of simpler non-living systems.
The article points out that creationists are fond of citing the Second Law of Thermodynamics as a refutation of non-divine theories of the origin of life, but they misrepresent the Second Law:
Creationists thus misinterpret the 2nd law to say that things invariably progress from order to disorder.
However, they neglect the fact that life is not a closed system. The sun provides more than enough energy to drive things. If a mature tomato plant can have more usable energy than the seed it grew from, why should anyone expect that the next generation of tomatoes can’t have more usable energy still?
That's the key point, and one that creationists try very hard to ignore: the Earth is not a closed system -- it gets energy from an outside source -- the sun -- and there are, and have been, injections of matter from outside --meteors and a more or less constant rain of interstellar dust.
It's an interesting article, and worth reading.
By the way, if you're interested in what the first living organisms were like, here's an interesting article.
Remains of microorganisms at least 3,770 million years old have been discovered by an international team led by UCL scientists, providing direct evidence of one of the oldest life forms on Earth.
Tiny filaments and tubes formed by bacteria that lived on iron were found encased in quartz layers in the Nuvvuagittuq Supracrustal Belt (NSB), Quebec, Canada.
The NSB contains some of the oldest sedimentary rocks known on Earth which likely formed part of an iron-rich deep-sea hydrothermal vent system that provided a habitat for Earth's first life forms between 3,770 and 4,300 million years ago. "Our discovery supports the idea that life emerged from hot, seafloor vents shortly after planet Earth formed. This speedy appearance of life on Earth fits with other evidence of recently discovered 3,700 million year old sedimentary mounds that were shaped by microorganisms," explained first author, PhD student Matthew Dodd (UCL Earth Sciences and the London Centre for Nanotechnology).
 |
| Haematite tubes from the NSB hydrothermal vent deposits that represent the oldest microfossils and evidence for life on Earth. Credit: Matthew Dodd |
No comments:
Post a Comment