How many creationists have heard about the Miller Urey experiment?

Question

In 1953, Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey, working at the University of Chicago, conducted an experiment that would change the approach of scientific investigation into the origin of life. Miller took molecules, which were believed to represent the major components of the early Earth's atmosphere and put them into a closed system. The gases they used were methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), and water (H2O). Next, he ran a continuous electric current through the system, to simulate lightning storms believed to be common on the early earth. Analysis of the experiment was done by chromotography. At the end of one week, Miller observed that as much as 10-15% of the carbon was now in the form of organic compounds. Two percent of the carbon had formed some of the amino acids, which are used to make proteins.

Perhaps most importantly, Miller's experiment showed that organic compounds such as amino acids, which are essential to cellular life, could be made easily under the conditions that scientists believed to be present on the early earth.

http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobiology/miller.html

I guess this must be "Satan's work" as well.

Answer 1

For your consideration:
If a far more advanced experiment produced an actual living breathing chimpanzee in the lab, the creationist would counter that until we get it to evolve into a new species we've proved nothing.

By the way, have you noticed in the answers how they use the word "creator" in a way that depicts a craftsman, or a watchmaker? It's almost as if they were blind to the fact that those folks "create" nothing - they merely reorganize existing materials.

Answer 2

Yup, this is a common fallacy. I'm not a strict creationist either but there are many things much more complicated than just amino acids that need to be organized together to "create" life. The best evidence that the experiment proves nothing either way is this: If this was conclusive evidence against creationism (or Intelligent Design) it is unfathomable that it would not have it's own chapter in every science textbook in America. It would be plastered all over the place as the conclusive nail in the coffin. The fact that it isn't shows that the evoloutionists themselves see how little it actually proves.

Answer 3

Try this

take four tires
four rims
steering wheel
1 gas tank
4 brake pads
some seats
wire
car radio with cd
a fan belt
muffler
car body
some paint
battery
coolant
oil

now take all those things and throw them in the air
What do you have when they land?
Do you have a fully assembled car? LOL
NO YOU DON'T AND DO YOU KNOW WHY?

Because the law is everything has a creator

And God is the creator of this world just like GM created cars

Now take a porshe and bury it in the ground for 1 year
ok then dig it up
Now do you have a viper?

See how evolution and the big bang are screwed up

Try Jesus!!! And then live life

Answer 4

Who made the lightening, the molecules, and all the other components that these scientists needed to conduct these experiments... It takes something to make something. Even if you believed in the big bang theory, who created the things that went bang. Everything even in it's most basic form needs a creator. Think about it?

Answer 5

the problem with that experiment is that only amino acids were formed. I am TOTALLY not a creationist, but the arguement made by creationists is that nothing else could have formed after the amino acids. it would be impossible for more to occur under only those conditions in the experiment.

Answer 6

Scientists made amino acids in a laboratory. Big deal.

Run an earthworm through a blender. You'll not only have amino acids, you'll have them in the right proportions. Let the scientists make an earthworm out of them.

The cornerstone of modern biology is biogenesis - life only comes from life.

Answer 7

"Get Your Own Dirt" -- a story for you.

One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this, let's say we have a man making contest." To which the scientist replied, "OK, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.

God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!"

Answer 8

This experiment serves as a good starting point ... but we still need additional proof. I'm confident we will make significant progress during the 21st century.

If the hyper-religious remain vigilant in teaching literal interpretations of Genesis, they will find themselves backed into a corner.

Answer 9

Whats your deal?

This is all scientist propaganda.

they can prove with wat they think to have been and determine wat they want to determine but it still remains....
God created the Earth end of discussion