Why have the fundamentalists overlooked the Urey/Miller experiments for over 50 years?

Question

If you do not know these were experiments that showed electricity when combined with gasses can produce molecules that are precursors to life. ( or as fundies like to say, they appeared out of randomness) I was just wondering how long it will take for these results to reach mainstream Christianity. It's been 53 years already.

conradmex: Show me some proof buddy.

Answer 1

Because there was oxygen present at all stages of the Earth's geologic column, and when ever there was oxygen introduced into the experiment the DNA formed was left-handed (contra-spiraled) which is toxic and causes degradation of DNA not the formation of cells. And incidentally that's why many scientists dismiss the experiments as being valid.

Answer 2

This experiment WAS hailed as a major breakthrough AT THE TIME. But there was a problem. Miller and Oparin did not have any real proof that the earth's early atmosphere was composed of ammonia, methane, and hydrogen, which Miller used in his experiment. They based their THEORY on physical chemistry. They wanted to get a chemical reaction that would be favorable, and so they proposed that the atmosphere was rich in those gases. Oparin was smart enough to know that if you start with inert gases like nitrogen and carbon dioxide, they won't react.

The deck was essentially stacked in advance to get the results they wanted. From1980 on, NASA scientists have shown that the primitive earth never had any methane, ammonia, or hydrogen to amount to anything. Instead, it was composed of water, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen - and you absolutely cannot get the same results with that mixture. It just won't work. More recent experiments have confirmed this to be the case.

So, scientific significance of Miller's experiment today, is zilch. When textbooks present the Miller experiment, they should be honest enough to say it was interesting historically but NOT terribly relevant to how life actually developed.

SO WAKE UP!

Answer 3

Not overlooked at all::
Abiogenesis is the theory that under the proper conditions life can arise spontaneously from non-living molecules. One of the most widely cited studies used to support this conclusion is the famous Miller–Urey experiment. Surveys of textbooks find that the Miller–Urey study is the major (or only) research cited to prove abiogenesis. Although widely heralded for decades by the popular press as ‘proving’ that life originated on the early earth entirely under natural conditions, we now realize the experiment actually provided compelling evidence for the opposite conclusion. It is now recognized that this set of experiments has done more to show that abiogenesis on Earth is not possible than to indicate how it could be possible. This paper reviews some of the many problems with this research, which attempted to demonstrate a feasible method of abiogenesis on the early earth.
Darwin recognized how critical the abiogenesis problem was for his theory. He even conceded that all existing terrestrial life must have descended from some primitive life-form that was originally called into life ‘by the Creator’.
According to many researchers today, an even more serious problem is the fact that the atmosphere of the early earth was very different from what Miller assumed. ‘Research has since drawn Miller’s hypothetical atmosphere into question, causing many scientists to doubt the relevance of his findings.

Answer 4

Well see it starts this way:
The scientists got together and decided they could Tell God to go away:
We don't need you anymore we can "CREATE LIFE"
Oh really God said lets see you do it
So the Scientists got together thier Bunsen Burners and started to ad some Gases.
"Umm Excuse me" God said "But Get your own Gases Please!"

You see the Urey/Miller Experiments DO NOT create Life "precursors" from NOTHING they create these Precursors FROM another PRECURSOR (The gases they used were methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), and water (H2O).) these Gases didn't exist until God created them. (see the first few verses in Genesis)

Answer 5

Well, some mainstream Christians, at least some of the people, are scientists and believe all of that, so in a sense it has already been accepted by Christians...some of them anyway.

Answer 6

unfortunately, they have still not produced life by sending electricity through an amino acid soup. If they did. it would definitely shut them up. Some people believe that life was seeded from an asteroid or comet from deep space.

Answer 7

lol, when i learned that in bio i almost fell off my chair.
i like to throw it at the creationists. a lot.

brad: they have NOT been proven invalid, there is just controversy among scientists about the amount of oxygen in the primitive atmosphere, because with copious amounts of oxygen, the experiment doesn't work.

Answer 8

Fundie nuts never take science classes because it is evil. This is why they need "Intelligent Design" approved as a science curriculum, so their retarded children can get science credits for graduation.

Answer 9

Yes, I have known of it for many years, and also of comets form Mars, But that has nothing to do with what really happened! LIFE DID NOT EVOLVE! It was SPOKEN INTO EXISTENCE!

Answer 10

Delete this question, you're making a mockery out of yourself.