|
When Darwin put forward his theory in the middle
of the nineteenth century, he never mentioned how the origin
of life, in other words the first living cell, came to be.
Scientists looking for the origin of life at the beginning
of the twentieth century began to realise that the theory
was invalid. The complex and perfect structure in life prepared
the ground for many researchers to perceive the truth of creation.
Mathematical calculations and scientific experiment and observation
demonstrated that life could not be the "product of chance,"
as the theory of evolution claimed.
With the collapse of the claim that coincidence
was responsible and the realisation that life was "planned,"
some scientists began to look for the origin of life in outer
space. The best-known of the scientists who made such claims
were Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe. These two cobbled
together a scenario in which they proposed that there was
a force which "seeded" life in space. According to the scenario,
these seeds were carried through the emptiness of space by
gas or dust clouds, or else by an asteroid, and eventually
reached the Earth, and life thus started here.
Nobel Prize-winner Francis Crick, co-discoverer
with James Watson of the double helix structure of DNA, is
one of those who has sought the origin of life in outer space.
Crick came to realise that it is quite unreasonable to expect
life to have started by chance, but he has claimed instead
that life on Earth was started by intelligent "extraterrestrial"
powers.
As we have seen, the idea that life came from
outer space has influenced prominent scientists. The matter
is now even discussed in writings and debates on the origin
of life. The idea of looking for the origin of life in outer
space can be considered from two basic perspectives.
Scientific inconsistency
It is not possible for meteors
to carry a living organism to Earth because of the intense
heat generated when they enter the atmosphere and the
violence of impact when they land. Above: A large meteor
crater in Arizona. Even if we accept there are living
things in outer space, it is still impossible to account
for their origins in any other way than through creation. |
The key to evaluating the "life began in outer
space" thesis lies in studying the meteorites that reached
the Earth and the clouds of gas and dust existing in space.
No evidence has yet been found to support the claim that celestial
bodies contained non-earthly creatures that eventually seeded
life on Earth. No research that has been carried out so far
has revealed any of the complex macromolecules that appear
in life forms.
Furthermore, the substances
contained in meteorites do not possess a certain kind of asymmetry
found in the macromolecules that constitute life. For instance,
amino acids, which make up proteins, which are themselves
the basic building blocks of life, should theoretically occur
as both left- and right-handed forms ("optical isomers") in
roughly equal numbers. However, only left-handed amino acids
are found in proteins, whereas this asymmetric distribution
does not occur among the small organic molecules (the carbon-based
molecules found in living things) discovered in meteorites.
The latter exist in both left- and right-handed forms.51
That is by no means the end of the obstacles
to the thesis that bodies and substances in outer space gave
rise to life on Earth. Those who maintain such an idea need
to be able to explain why such a process is not happening
now, because the Earth is still being bombarded by meteorites.
However, study of these meteorites has not revealed any "seeding"
to confirm the thesis in any way.
Another question confronting the defenders of
the thesis is this: Even if it is accepted that life was formed
by a consciousness in outer space, and that it somehow reached
Earth, how did the millions of species on Earth come about?
That is a huge dilemma for those who suggest that life began
in space.
Alongside all of these obstacles, no trace has
been found in the universe of a civilisation or life form
that could have started life on Earth. No astronomical observations,
which have picked up enormous speed in the last 30 years,
have given any indication of the presence of such a civilisation.
What lies behind the "extraterrestrial"
thesis?
As we have seen, the theory that life on Earth
was begun by extraterrestrials has no scientific basis to
it. No discoveries have been made to confirm or support it.
However, when the scientists who put forward the suggestion
began to look in that direction, they did so because they
perceived one important truth.
The truth in question is that a theory that seeks
to explain life on Earth as being the result of chance is
no longer tenable. It has been realised that the complexity
revealed in the life forms on Earth can only be the product
of intelligent design. In fact, the areas of expertise of
the scientists who sought the origin of life in outer space
give a clue as to their rejection of the logic of the theory
of evolution.
Both are world-renowned scientists: Fred Hoyle
is an astronomer and bio-mathematician, and Francis Crick
a molecular biologist.
|
|
EVOLUTIONISTS'
"EXTRATERRESTRIAL" DILEMMA
Claims that
the origin of life could lie in space, or even "extraterrestrials,"
are nothing more than science fiction. No concrete evidence
can be supplied to back them up, and news and comments
on the subject just consist of speculation that "it
could have happened." In fact, these scenarios are quite
impossible. Even if we assume that some organic compounds
were carried to Earth by meteors, it is a chemical,
physical, and mathematical fact that these compounds
could not have given rise to life by themselves. The
fantasy that life on Earth could have been created by
"extraterrestrials" is a ploy by means of which evolutionists
try to avoid admitting the existence of God, since life
cannot be explained by chance. But this is totally meaningless,
too, because the "extraterrestrial" thesis just takes
the question one step back, and leads to the question:
"Who created the extraterrestrials?" Reason and science
lead us to an Absolute Being Who created us and all
living things, though He Himself was not created and
has existed forever. That means God, the Creator of
everything.
|
One point which needs to be considered is that
those scientists who look to outer space to find the origin
of life do not actually make any new interpretation of the
matter. Scientists such as Hoyle ,
Wickramasinghe, and Crick began to consider the possibility
that life came from space because they realised that life
could not have come about by chance. Since it was impossible
for life on Earth to have begun by chance, they had to accept
the existence of a source of intelligent design in outer space.
However, the theory put forward by them on the
subject of the origin of this intelligent design is contradictory
and meaningless. Modern physics and astronomy have revealed
that our universe originated as a result of a huge explosion
some 12-15 billion years ago known as "The Big Bang." All
matter in the universe came about from that explosion. For
this reason, any idea that seeks the origin of life on Earth
in another matterbased life form in the universe has to explain
in turn how that form of life came into existence. The meaning
of this is that such a suggestion does not actually solve
the problem, but takes it one step further back. (For more
detail, see Harun Yahya's books The
Creation of the Universe and Timelessness
and The Reality of Fate).
THE SUPERSTITION
EVOLUTIONISTS SO BLINDLY BELIEVE IN:
|
Inanimate matter
|
+
|
Time
|
=
|
Millions of complex living species
|
The above formula is the shortest
way of expressing the theory of evolution. Evolutionists
believe that inanimate and unconscious collections of
atoms and molecules came together and organised themselves
over time, finally becoming alive and turning into millions
of exceedingly complex and perfect living species. This
superstition is backed up by no known physical or chemical
law. On the contrary, the laws of physics and chemistry
show that time has a "disorganising, destructive" effect,
not an "organising" one (the Second Law of Thermodynamics).
Actually, the "time" factor is nothing but a deception
used by evolutionists to take their theory out of the
field of observation. Since no "evolutionary process"
which creates new living things can be observed in nature,
evolutionists try to gloss over this fact by saying:
"Yes, evolution cannot be observed, but it may have
taken place over the previous millions of years." This
claim is also torn down by the fossil record, which
shows that no evolutionary process ever happened.
|
As we have seen, the thesis that "life came
from outer space" does not support evolution, but is a view
that reveals the impossibility of evolution and accepts that
there can be no other explanation for life than intelligent
design. The scientists who suggested this began with a correct
analysis but then went down a false road, and started the
silly search for the origin of life in outer space.
It is obvious that the concept of "extraterrestrials"
cannot account for the origin of life. Even if we accept for
one moment the hypothesis that "extraterrestrials" actually
exist, it is still clear that they could not have come into
being by chance, but must themselves be the product of intelligent
design. (That is because the laws of physics and chemistry
are the same everywhere in the universe, and they make it
impossible for life to emerge by chance.) This shows that
God, Who is beyond matter and time, and possesses infinite
might, wisdom, and knowledge, created the universe and everything
in it.
  
51. Massimo
Pigliucci, Rationalists of East Tennessee Book Club Discussion,
October 1997
|
