Abiogenesis
Vs Supernatural origin of life
Ubiquitous questions like
the origin of life really enthuses everyone. Despite years of research this
question couldn’t be reasonably answered by the evolutionary biologists.
Several theories have been put forth but none of them could provide a
convincing answer. The most popular among them was Abiogenesis theory, which
belived that life can arise spontaneously under proper conditions from
non-living molecules.
A group of scientists have
come up with the scientific explantion that contests the possibility of
emergence of life on earth stated under theory of abiogenesis. Scientists
believed that life must have emerged spontaneously by combination of the
organic elements CH4 (methane), NH3 (Ammonia), H2 (Hydrogen) during lightining
and thunder storms. Resulting in the production of aminoacids and gradually
these begin to assemble into functional units and thus life must have made an
appearance. But the various aspects those were under contention are as follows:
1. Miller and Urey had designed
experiments based on the idea that early earth must have been dominated by CH4,
NH3, H2. A series of experiments were conducted under high temperatures
mimicking the conditions at that time and produced trace amounts of amino
acids. The amino acids thus obtained were a compostion of both right-handed and
left-handedorganic molecules termed as racemic mixture. It is well known that
all the aminoacids which can form functional proteins are left-handed and the
carbohydrates are right-handed. So the right -handed aminoacids are useless and
they might be actually be lethal to life. Chirality problem.
2. As we all know earth's atmosphere
contains nearly 21% of oxygen. But it is widely known that oxygen is deterrant
to origin of life. Evidence of presence of O2 in early atmosphere is clear as
photodissociation of large amounts of watervapour would result in O2 in
atmosphere. Presence of oxidised material is evidenced in pre-cambrian geological
strata. Even some Uranium geochemistry data suggested presence of oxidising
conditions on earth and thus existence of mechanism of photosynthesis much
earlier than 3.7 billion years ago. So it is now it is belived that life must
have existed on earth from a much earlier age or rather from the age when earth
could support life. So this could be a blow to chemical synthesis theory of
Urey and Miller.
3.
Earth
during its formative stages has lot of volcanoes.
They usually emit CO (Carbonmonoxide), CO2 (Carbondioxide) , NO2 (Nitrous
Oxide) and water vapour. CO2 greatly deters formation of organic compounds.
4. Functional proteins can exist in
very narrow range of conditions. Most proteins remain active at optimum pH and
temperature. So their existence and functioning at supernatural temperatures as
observed during the Miller-Urey experiments is impossible. High amount of
energy used in these experiments might have been disruptive to proteins
5.
Cross-reaction
in abiochemical reaction might interfere with aminoacid production. The
reaction soup included several toxic compounds like cyanides etc.
6. Presence of heavy metal atoms and
sometimes sugars usually disrupt the aminoacid formation. It is very difficult
to imagine how their experiment could take care of all these issues.
7.
UV light and lights in all other forms of
wavelenghts would be disruptive for various life forms. Moreso amino acids are
very delicate and would brekadown easily even under normal sunlight.
8.
Chemical
reactions which were thought to have occurred in the hot seats life
hydorthermal vents and submarine vents are impossible as at high temperatures,
compounds would breakdown. Another problem is self-assembly of these molecules.
Source of information that directs the assembly of these already formed
substance is not explained.
9.
Urey
even speculated presence of atleast 10% of organic matter in oceans today which
must have been the base material for the evolution of life on earth. But 10% seems
to be a very huge amount and its existence is questionable (even the total
amount of the extant material will not be able to produce a fraction of this
amount).
Despite intensive research,
in this interdisciplinary field of evolution, concerted efforts couldn’t
replicate the experiments performed by Miller and Urey. Finally people started
believing that origin of life is far from being trivial.
All these indicate that
condition on early earth would have never favoured the origin of life by
abiogenesis theory.
Most of the scientists find
these experiment very alluring due to the fact they are very close to
understanding the fantasy of origin of life. Naturalisits have come up with
several theories which doesn’t approve any creator or designer to have intitiated
the origin of life. But the role of under natural condition as proposed under
this theory are scientifically refuted. Life must have either a natural
(abiogenesis) or supernatural origin. But now it is clear that creation of the
basic-building block of life is under highly designed, non-natural and tightly
controlled conditions.
Science believes in facts
which are autheticated by demonstrations and reproducible experiments. Mere
compilation of facts and dramatic events have no place in its dictionary. Though
it is hard to accept, but it is more clear life began on earth due to an
intelligent intervention.
@ Copy rights reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment