Billions of atoms forms one molecule, billions of molecules forms one living cell, all by accident?

Question

And, Of course, billions of trillions of cells forms one of us. I honestly believe it takes a lot more faith to actually believe that we are all here by accident than that God created the universe and us.

boukenger: thats exactly what I'm not saying, you got the exact opposite meaning of my question.

Parrot: Nothing about God is known. Thats why its called faith.

andymcj66: Supernatural force is exactly what God is.

firehair: No, only an argument in favor of theism, but not in favor of any one particular theology.

bc_munkee: I'll try my best to keep an open mind.

Lisa: Science also only tells us how. It takes faith to get to why.

YDoncha_B: Charles Darwin believed God created us through evolution. Because in his book; The Origin of the Species he is referring to "the hand of the creator".

aiguy: My point exactly. I don't believe its all an accident.

Answer 1

Try to learn some life sciences abiogenesis theory and you probably would not refer to the result of millions of year of evolution as an accident. Random combinations of increasingly complex building blocks over millions of years over the entire surface of the earth allows evolution to counteract the effects of entropy with evolved anti-entropy or extropy.

Experiments in sealed glass environments in which conditions simulated theorized early conditions on earth were able to recreate complexity up to the level of amino acids.

The next step to proteins was not accomplished but remember evolution had all the oceans of the earth and millions of years to experiment in and not just one small glass container over a period of a few weeks. Recent discoverys in viral research and nano bacteria suggest at least a few evolutionary stages between amino acids and full fledged proteins. The DNA molecule being the major milestone which all subsequent life was formed on.

Answer 2

Only if you want those atoms to spontaneously generate a human being or a complex cell.

How about this -- nothing more than a bilipid layer surrounding a simple self-replicating protein, maybe 100 amino acids long, or self-replicating RNA, maybe 60 bases long.

Over a few hundred million years in an environment with oils and water churning, and plenty of raw amino acids, this is plausible.

Take two of these things that have different proteins in it. Make them touch. Their bilipid layer is so simple they'll merge, the layers are pretty flimsy still. The different proteins merrily go about doing their thing. Or if you prefer, go the RNA route.

Your semi-cell picks up some RNA that both codes for proteins as well as the self-duplication protion. This is a pretty nifty trick, requiring less than 100 base pairs.

You now have a full cell. Evolution begins at this point, all with plausible small tiny steps along the way.

The only reason you are having a hard time is because you're still stuck in this 'all at once' mentality that fundmentalist brainwashing has given you, and not looking at the true age of the universe or the planet.

---

Scott M -- Just a case in point ... a mole of carbon weighs 12.011 grams, and contains 6.0221415 × 10^23 atoms. 12.011 grams is 60.05500 carats. The Hope Diamond started as a single 112 3/16 carat diamond.

A diamond is a single covalent crystal though it may have inclusions and flaws internal that in areas disrupt the perfect lattice, however, as a whole, the diamond is still a tetragonally bonded covalent crystal. So the original Hope Diamond would have contained 1.86808 moles of carbon, or 3.2237077 x 10^23 atoms, far, FAR more than 1.0 x 10^9.

----

Revenge, you REALLY need to go retake Chemistry. Bohr's model was introduced in 1913 and was replaced during the quantum 'revolution' by Schrodinger's equations which established the electron orbitals (which are not, in fact, circles or orbitals, in fact, except for a few). In fact, the electron doesn't exist at one spot -- it exists literally everywhere it is possible for it to exist, just in differing probabilities.

Answer 3

Not an accident. There is no such thing as an accident. There is just probabilities and nature.

The nature of mangnets is to come together with the north pole of 1 facing the south pole of the other. Does it take a designer to do that? No. It just takes the probabilities which are based on the strength of the magnet, the distance between the magnets and the amount of friction on the surface they are on.

Does revenge is sweet really think that atoms look like mini solar systems? She must not have taken Chemistry in a few decades.

Answer 4

Achieving self replication is the only improbablity. Once you get to it every thing else follows logically. The first self-replicating system was probably under 100,000 atoms in under 100 molecule. It took hundreds of millions of years to develop in the total volume of the oceans. The added complexity accrued in three and a half billion years. Lack of comprehension of scale (which you have demonstrated) is not a basis for rejection of a theory.

Answer 5

Then how many cells form God?

Edit: No, that wasn't my point. If it's so hard to believe that a molecule could have come from nothing, why, then, should a person believe that something as complicated and complex as God could have come from nothing? If your answer is "because we have faith" -- why? Why is one believable and not the other?

Answer 6

Okay dude. Think about it like this. There are MILLIONS of us in cities. But was this done by god? MILLIONS in one city. Did God do it? Was it a coincidence? It was neither. It was that living things do what they must to survive. They join up together to make bigger bodies. The molecules were always there. Nobody knows how cells were originally formed, but this explains how multicellular organisms were formed.

Answer 7

First thing. I am not sure there is any molecule thattakes billions of atoms to form. Most are fairly simple, with a few getting into the hundreds or thousands. Second, your logic is just asinine. I was going to go into more detail, but I feel it would just fall on deaf ears, so good day.

Answer 8

Sorry "God" what is that? Something that man manufactures in an image that conforms to his beliefs with characteristics that man deems fit to grant him. What is a "God"? If you can't provide evidence to define what this God thing is I don't need to believe in him or it. Some supernatural force might or might not have created the universe but I'm not simply inventing a deity and labelling it the creator.

Answer 9

There are no molocules formed by "billions" of atoms.

The development from non-life to life is called "abiogenisis", and it is a field that is studied in chemestry.

The development of life, and finally intelligence, is not "accidental". It is the result of natural processes that, while somewhat random on an individual level, are directed by environmental, sexual, and other natural factors. No divine interference nessecary.

Answer 10

Well this is a great circumstantial argument and perhaps a decent reason to become agnostic (but I’ll stay an atheist, thank you).

Still, it has no relevance to Christianity (or any theological god), so I hope that wasn’t the point you were trying to make.