Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

One thing naturalism has done for origin of life studies: Eliminated the sell-by date

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Science-Fictions-square.gif

When we checked on them last week, origin of life researchers were feeling a bit glum about their progress. Some of us can think of at least one reason why:

Life is a state, an experience that everyone has and thinks he can recognize in other people and things. We think life is very important, yet no one can define it.

It would help if there was some natural law that just “naturally” produced life but

The theorists do not at present have any idea what factors underlie such a law or how it has worked. Or why it is not working now, so far as we know (in the sense that new types of life are not self-assembling around us). They know that the law exists because life exists, chance is powerless to create it, and devotion to the philosophy of naturalism rules out design.

File:6sided dice.jpg
all six sides/diacritica

And then, of course, naturalism has no sell-by date:

Disconcertingly, there is no built-in expiration date for this position. There is no point at which, all natural options having been exhausted, we are free to reconsider it, even if we fail to find a naturalistic answer indefinitely. More.

On this view, naturalism is not just a tool of science, it is its only justification.  Well then, let’s go back and have another look at origin of life theories based only on chance. We will try to find one that we feel could possibly have happened, and order tee shirts for the project.

Do not dry clean.

We will start with one of the first, comparatively easy hurdles that any such theory faces:

Life started quickly. Some recent research has identified life on land over two billion years ago, consisting of a fungus whose central cavity was filled with symbiotic bacteria. Some Australian fossils are said to date back to 3.5 billion years old, not long after the cooling of Earth’s crust from the bombardment by planetesimals (rocky objects) at 3.85 billion years ago. Of course, some such current findings may be revised. But the general trend has been to the discovery of ever-earlier instances of life on Earth. That means that very complex and precise sequences of events must have taken place in a short period of time. Also, we don’t know in detail what the conditions on early Earth were like so it is difficult to refine the search by ruling out whole classes of theories. More.

Coming up with plausible chance scenarios that get around these problems might be easier than we think, certainly compared to the next, steeper hurdles. For them, we will simply have to order new shirts; perhaps they will say:

Do NOT dry clean.

Oh wait … Let’s work on the wording of this one on the right side a bit. Anyway, wish us luck.

See also:

Is there a good reason to believe that life’s origin must be a fully natural event?

Does nature just “naturally” produce life?

Can all the numbers for life’s origin just happen to fall into place?

The Science Fictions series fingertips (origin of life)

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments
my two cents: Atheist=The first Cause of everything is none living entity. naturalist and materialist all the same.They want eliminate the Idea, that the Origin of everything is possibly an living Entity with mind. For God is living. So that is how i define life (please correct me, if i'm wrong): entities, who has freedom to produce and maintain Order, those orders are not results from natural laws and chance. To maintain Order means to reverse the effect of the second law of thermodynamics.peter_G
February 19, 2014
February
02
Feb
19
19
2014
06:31 PM
6
06
31
PM
PDT
RodW- Yes, cytosine doesn't last very long outside of an organism. Definitely not long enough for it to be part of a stable RNA chainJoe
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
10:42 AM
10
10
42
AM
PDT
And yet we "KNOW" that life was formed by abiogenesis. Wake me up when the real science begins.OldArmy94
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
09:43 AM
9
09
43
AM
PDT
Joe, I think you could easily measure how long a chemical could persist but I was probably wrong in suggesting anything could last millions of years. What is certain is that there would have been nothing to eat it. Eric I think it would be impossible to do the experiment today. What I think happened way-back-when is that there were hundreds or thousands of different envirnoments such as deep ocean 'smokers', dessicating pools of salt and chemicals under UV light, the interiors of minerals etc and each of these would be catalysing reactions. The products of these would diffuse to other enviroments to produce yet more products. After 50-100 million years complex reactions we'd call quasi-life had come into extistence. At best we could only test bits and pieces of what we guess was occurring. If we can ever study the oceans under Europa and Ganymede maybe we can get an idea of some of the pathways that would have lead to life.RodW
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
09:14 AM
9
09
14
AM
PDT
RodW, Yes, that is the standard explanation for why we don't see abiogenesis today. Let's set aside the problems with that idea for a moment and assume it is true. It should be pretty easy to create a "sterile" environment (say, in the lab), that simulates early Earth. Given all the millions spent on abiogenesis research, it seems that would be a pretty obvious, and relatively cheap, use of funding to test the theory. What results have we seen from such abiogenesis experiments, starting with Miller-Urey and beyond? Any objective, observational reason to think that abiogenesis could occur under such "sterile" conditions?Eric Anderson
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
08:06 AM
8
08
06
AM
PDT
RodW:
The primordial earth was sterile so that complex molecules that formed could persist for millions of years.
Nice untestable assertion.Joe
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
06:53 AM
6
06
53
AM
PDT
Design:
If it’s not occurring now where the earth is basically an abiogenesis candy store (amino acids and nucleic acids everywhere), then how did it ever happen in the first place when these building blocks were non-existent?
The primordial earth was sterile so that complex molecules that formed could persist for millions of years. Now all complex molecules are immediately eaten by bacteria. The conditions on the earth now are very different from what they were back then so we have good reason to think abiogenesis wouldn't occur now. The salinity of the oceans is different, there is little UV light, the temperature is different and today the atmosphere is filled with a poison that degrades chemicals and makes many chemical reactions impossibleRodW
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
06:23 AM
6
06
23
AM
PDT
Oops! The computer was not responding so I hit the post button a couple of times. If the moderator would kindly remove these extra posts, I would appreciate it!tjguy
February 18, 2014
February
02
Feb
18
18
2014
01:11 AM
1
01
11
AM
PDT
One thing naturalism has done for origin of life studies: Eliminated the sell-by date
Exactly right! It allows them to maintain their faith indefinitely even if there is absolutely no answer in view for it. "I'm sure that we'll find the answer someday!" is all they can say. How scientific is that?! It provides great job security because no one can ever show it to be wrong! They'll never be out of work! No only can you not show it to be wrong, neither can you show it to be right either! You just have to take it by faith.tjguy
February 17, 2014
February
02
Feb
17
17
2014
11:17 PM
11
11
17
PM
PDT
Excellent point, D! I don't recollect that being said before.Ian Thompson
February 17, 2014
February
02
Feb
17
17
2014
10:34 PM
10
10
34
PM
PDT
As opposed to when abiogenesis supposedly occurred, the earth is currently loaded with abiogenesis building blocks, yet there is no evidence of abiogenesis occurring anywhere on the face of the earth. If it’s not occurring now where the earth is basically an abiogenesis candy store (amino acids and nucleic acids everywhere), then how did it ever happen in the first place when these building blocks were non-existent?Design
February 17, 2014
February
02
Feb
17
17
2014
05:13 PM
5
05
13
PM
PDT

Leave a Reply