Where did life come from? Is evolution really the best scientific answer?

Answer 1

Evolution isn't the answer to the question "where did life come from". Evolution tells us what happens once there is life - it explains the diversity of life that we see.

The origin of life in the first place is described by a different field, abiogenesis. So far there are not any conclusive theories of abiogenesis, although there are some promising avenues of research - it's an interesting field.

Answer 2

To often this is posed as an either/or question. It is quite possible some "external agency" created life and guided its subsequent evolution. We have no concrete evidence of that, so believing it would require faith.

Is evolution the best scientific answer for the subsequent origin of species? Cleary yes. We have no competing scientific answer. If we did, the competing theory would have to fit the available data at least as well as evolution does--and that just does not seem likely.

We can be very confident that the most complex organisms on our planet for several billion years were single celled. Fossil stromatolites have been dated more than two billion years old, whereas no metazoan (mutlicelled) fossil organisms exceed 750,000,000 years. Until the early devonian, less than half a billion years ago, all fossils are of marine organisms. Finally, a little over 400 million years ago, we find fossils of amphibious creatures very much like those of early rhipidistian fishes of the same era.

The theory of evolution explains these facts very well. There is no competing scientific theory in this arena, and at the present time is appears entirely unlikely one will ever be developed.

Answer 3

Well, no. I have found a flaw in Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. Ok, we apparently came from monkeys which evolved from organisms such as Paramecium and Amoebas. They evolved from Bacteria maybe. Where did the Bacteria come from? There is no way whatsoever that Bacteria could come from inanimate objects or abiotic factors such as rocks, sand, dirt, etc. The only way is if a god or something else created it. Some people suggest that meteors came from space and brung Bacteria here. But the same question applies. Where did the bacteria come from and what did that evolve from? It all leads down to intelligent design. There is a theory that the Big Bang could have created bacteria. Well, here's something to think about. 1. We are not actually sure that the big bang actually happened.
2. If the Big Bang did happen, I find it highly unlikely that carbon atoms formed themselves into cytoplasm and organelles. If you look, bacteria and amoebas are pretty complex beings. How did the different organelles form from a few carbon atoms? It can't happen.
You can think what you want to about evolution, but I just disproved it right here and right now.

Answer 4

the theory that best explanation is that the chemical and temperature conditions around black smokers (volcanic pipes) caused the best conditions in which the chemical soup reacted and formed basic DNA and life goo, to put it simply
People should question Evolution (its good science) but until you have a better answer, no other idea makes sense. at present it is the best idea and is backed up by the most scientific evidence. until something can expalin things "better" with more evidence, its the best scientific answer, and it makes sense

Answer 5

At my current stage of enlightenment, I believe that natural evolution is a fact, along with all the laws of nature, but that from time to time a Supreme Being "interferes" to bring about dramatic changes. For example, introducing the life force into non-living matter that can thereafter sustain it; tinkering with a primate's DNA to produce the human race; causing an asteroid to strike the Earth so as to eliminate the dinosaurs (which weren't about to be made into intelligent beings, and which were eating all the vegetation), etc., etc. With this concept, there is no real conflict between Creationism and Evolution. Both could be true.

Answer 6

For now, with what we know and have learned, evolution is the best answer. Life seems to have developed on its own, as a single prokaryotic cell millions of years ago, or billions maybe. Prokaryotic cells, bacteria, then probably slowly started to change over time, and that's how a eukaryotic cell developed in the first place. But there really isn't anything set in stone. We learn new things every day.

Answer 7

Few people need choose between religion and evolution.

You can believe in a higher power that created us and watches over us today and still believe in evolution. Evolution may have been a step in the process.

All you have to drop is an Anglican Bishop who, 500 years ago, said his interpretation of the Bible was that the Earth was created all at once, dinosaurs and man alike, 6000 years ago. He was just a man, and he was wrong.

Most scientists who question evolution still don't believe that.

Here's a website of a devout Christian and a scientist. He believes in religion and he believes in evolution.

htttp:///www.reasons.org

Answer 8

Evolution is not scientific. It is a faith as much as believing God created us. In real science, a theory is accepted as proven when it can be repeated in a lab. Gravity is a proven theory because it is perfectly repeatable. We know it is true. Evolution cannot be proven. With all the knowledge we supposedly have about how life evolved, we cannot so much as produce a simple grape in a lab. And yet evolutionists will have us believe life forms somehow managed to appear in a pond.

Assuming a life form did manage to start in the pond, evolutionists will then have us believe other life forms evolved through a series of genetic mutations. There is no evidence that mutations ever result in the addition of new information or in the improvement of a living creature. Mutations generally have a negative affect. Another problem is why bi-sexual reproduction? Surely asexual would have been easier and thus the path that the evolution of the human would have taken. There are many more problems, these are just a few.

I am not saying I can prove God created us, but in my mind the evidence for a Creator is all around. Look at the human body, it is absolutely amazing. With all the science and research in the world we cannot come close to making a camera that is as anywhere near as advanced as the human eye for example.

If people want to believe in evolution, fine, it's a free world.. but it is simply not fact and should not be thought of as a proven theory. It is a faith.

I think it takes more faith to believe evolution that in does to believe in a Creator. Evolution only came about because someone didn't like the only other possibility - God exists!

Answer 9

Evolution isn't a theory of where life comes from. Evolution attempts to explain the natural process by which organisms adapt to their surroundings. Some adjustments organisms make are behavioral, others are genetic. The process by which those genes instrumental to adaptation become prevalent in the overall population/gene pool is understood as natural selection and makes the central claim of evolution.

Answer 10

It sure is. It is supported by the fossil record, as well as molecular evidence and is readily visible on the small scale. Evolution explains the diversity of life we see today.

If you want to learn more about evolution on the small scale, read about the Gran'ts research on Galapagos finches.

Or Dawkin's The Blind Watchmaker.

Evolution is the only theory that makes sense for explaining present day diversity, though it doesn't postulate how life started, just how it changed.