Really. then please give me just one source that shows how:
- Life started
- An example of a macro-evolution, the kind that shows how an organism gains new information. Because if we all started as a simple life form (without DNA I might add) somehow this genetic information was gained.
edit: I do not deny micro-evolution by the way
Here is some light reading for those interested
discovery.org/articleFiles/PDFs/DNAPerspectives.pdf
trueorigin.org/spetner1.asp
trueorigin.org/isakrbtl.asp
Hi,
For #1…
"Scientists may have figured out the chemistry that sparked the beginning of life on Earth.
The new findings map out a series of simple, efficient chemical reactions that could have formed molecules of RNA, a close cousin of DNA, from the basic materials available more than 3.85 billion years ago, researchers report online May 13 in Nature.
“This is a very impressive piece of work — a really excellent analysis,” comments chemist James Ferris of the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, N.Y.
The new research lends support to the idea that RNA-based life-forms were the first step toward the evolution of modern life. Called the RNA world hypothesis, the idea was first proposed some 40 years ago. But until now, scientists couldn’t figure out the chemical reactions that created the earliest RNA molecules.
Today, DNA encodes the genetic blueprint for life — excluding some viruses, for those who consider viruses living — and RNA acts as an intermediary in the process, making protein from DNA. But most scientists think it’s unlikely that DNA was the basis of the origin of life, says study coauthor John Sutherland of the University of Manchester in England.
Information-bearing DNA holds the code needed to put proteins together, but at the same time, proteins catalyze the reactions that produce DNA. It’s a chicken-or-egg problem. Scientists don’t think that DNA and proteins could have come about independently — regardless of which came first — and yet still work together in this way.
Excerpt from:
sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/43723/title/How_RNA_got_started
#2…
"Evolution, the overarching concept that unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses. In evolutionary debates one is apt to hear evolution roughly parceled between the terms “microevolution” and “macroevolution”. Microevolution, or change beneath the species level, may be thought of as relatively small scale change in the functional and genetic constituencies of populations of organisms.
Common descent is a general descriptive theory that concerns the genetic origins of living organisms (though not the ultimate origin of life). The theory specifically postulates that all of the earth’s known biota are genealogically related, much in the same way that siblings or cousins are related to one another. Thus, macroevolutionary history and processes necessarily entail the transformation of one species into another and, consequently, the origin of higher taxa. Because it is so well supported scientifically, common descent is often called the “fact of evolution” by biologists. For these reasons, proponents of special creation are especially hostile to the macroevolutionary foundation of the biological sciences.
This article directly addresses the scientific evidence in favor of common descent and macroevolution. This article is specifically intended for those who are scientifically minded but, for one reason or another, have come to believe that macroevolutionary theory explains little, makes few or no testable predictions, is unfalsifiable, or has not been scientifically demonstrated."
Full article at:
talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
I am still at a loss why many spiritual people cling to creationism as truth. For me, the facts behind how we got here is independent of my understanding of God. An understanding of one does not deny the other. Why do religious bodies cling to a 2,000 year old myth?
Our universe is a truly amazing place! The more we learn about cosmology, the more questions and mysteries we see. The mysteries are absolutely magical! How do black holes suck massive quantities of matter through a space the size of a pinhead and where does that matter end up at? What is “dark matter” and “dark energy?” How does “entanglement theory” seemingly violate the “speed of light” limit many times over? How does the observation of quantum events by itself alter the results? How does time and gravity interfere with each other? Do multiple universes exist and if so, what might they be?
Then there are even bigger questions like: What is the energy or presence we feel and experience that we call “God?” Understanding God theory is one of life’s ongoing tasks.
I have a theory, maybe right and maybe wrong, but until new evidence appears, it fills the holes with logic for me and my cosmology.
The effect or presence of what we call “God” is the ambient energy of the universe sourced from all life animate and inanimate. We all are matter and energy. That matter and energy has our unique imprint upon it. I call this imprinted energy “soul” and it is infinite and fills infinity. All “souls” fill infinity and merge into a “oneness” yet maintain their individual imprint. Collectively this energy is what we perceive as God.
Blessed be, Dousias
Where does one draw the line? How do we know where to draw the line?
)