What Is the Origin of Life? - Why the Riddles?

A person today can look back over nearly half a century of speculation and thousands of attempts to prove the life originated on its own.  If one does that, it would be hard to disagree with Nobel laureate Francis Crick.  Speaking about origin-of-life, Crick observed that there is "too much speculation running after two two facts." It is thus understandable that some scientists who examine the facts conclude that life is much too complex to pop up even in an organized laboratory, let alone in a controlled environment. 

If advanced science cannot prove that life could arise by itself, why do some scientists continue to hold to such theories?  (Note: Because they cannot believe that if they cannot come up with something themselves, then it does not exist or its impossible for life to begin through God. A lot of scientists are non-believers  in God. This is their theory, if it did not come out of a laboratory, it doesn't exist, which is stupid. Just like some doctors who are non-believers, they think they are Gods. That is what is impossible.)  A few decades ago, Professor J.D. Bernal offered some insight in the book The Origin of Life: "By applying the strict canons of scientific method to this subject [the spontaneous generation of life], it is possible to demonstrate effectively several places in the story, how life could not have arisen:  the improbabilities are too great, the chances of the emergence of life too small."  He added:  "Regrettably from this point of view, life is here on Earth in all its multiplicity of forms and activities and the arguments have to be bent around to support its existence." And the picture has not improved. 

Consider the underlying import of such reasoning. It is as much as saying:  'Scientifically it is correct to stated that life cannot have begun by itself.  But spontaneously arising life is the only possibility that we will consider. So it is necessary to bend the arguments to support the hypothesis that life arose spontaneously.' Are you comfortable with such logic? (Note: No! Because I know better)  Does not such reasoning call for a lot of 'bending of the facts?  (Heck no!) 

There are, however, knowledgeable, respected scientists who do not see a need to bend the facts to fit a prevailing philosophy on the origin of lie.Rather, they permit the facts to point to a reasonable conclusion. What facts and what conclusion? 

Next time: What Is the Origin of Life? -Information and Intelligence

From the book Is There a Creator That Cares About You?