science genuis' i need help! x?

Question

Why is it difficult for scientists to find evidence to support a theory of the begining of life???

Answer 1

Good question! The universe and beyond is massive. If you had seen what else is out there I guess it would be hard to believe that this tiny world was elite! Just a personal theory.

Answer 2

Because until recently they couldn't come up with the first ingredients that have formed what is now called life. But we now know those ingredients and the theory is currently getting rewrote. It should take a few more years before the answer comes out of this newly acquired knowledge.
You see 99% of all bioelements created in laboratory don't respect the order into which organic material are joined together. Since the molecules of life respect a certain configuration that is not even reproducible in our laboratory, it was quite difficult to find a coherent theory about the beginning of life.

Answer 3

0) Teltale precursors no longer exist - the Earth's surface has been completly churned through gelogical processes several times.

1) Relevant theory cannot be validated. Life has never been generated within an initially sterile system,

Google Images
abiotic miller 1680 hits

2) Relevant theory cannot be falsified.

3) Biological homochirality (all natural chiral protein amino acids are L-configuration, all natural chiral sugars are D-configuration) remains unexplained. Efforts to rationalize it are not believable, e.g.,

Mendeleev Commun. 13(3) 129 (2003)
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 41(24) 4619 (2002)
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 41(7) 1139 (2002)
Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 39(22) 4033 (2000)
Chem. Phys. Chem. 2(7) 409 (2001)
Phys. Rev. Lett. 84(17) 3811 (2000)

4) Religous arguments (e.g., a god's breath directed into a clay model) are empirically silly. Living tissue is uniquely bereft of aluminum and silicate chemistries.

Answer 4

Because it was four billion years ago, or thereabouts, and subsequent life has done a thorough job of burying evidence left over from that long ago. The original life was at most single-cell (if the concept of cell even applied to it, which may not be so), so any remains would be tiny and very hard to find, even if scientists knew exactly what to look for -- which they don't. There have been things found in ancient rocks which may be traces of early life, but it is hard to tell for sure.

Answer 5

Because no one was there at the start of everything that is here today, and the theories we have now may seem feasable, but we really don'tr know if they are. They may be able to come up with some good theories, but they might just need their knowledge, not evidence, so they might be using their logic to support their theories to the beginning of life, not evidence.

Answer 6

The theory of the begining of time was so long ago that there is only rocks from years ago to support the theory, therefore leaving the scientists to their own records and other interterrestrial intelligence
Hope this helps
-x-

Answer 7

No. the finished doctrine of "Non-overlapping Magesteria" or NOMA is finished nonsense. faith DOES make real claims about the universe, claims which technological know-how can and does check out. at the same time as technological know-how refutes the claims of religion about the organic international, the position will faith's real claims proceed to be unchallenged? contained in the untestable supernatural international? Than what use faith if it may purely proceed to be intellectually attainable by technique of creating untestable claims? And to assert that a medical knowledge of actuality does no longer help us make fee judgments is mere lack of expertise.

Answer 8

It is hard for scientists to find evidence because it was so long a go and the evidence would probably be extremely hard to find it could be hidden under land that formed over many years or under buildings you never know.Have a great day!!!

Answer 9

Because the evidence could be hundreds of millions of years old, locked away deep underground, under a sea bed or trapped in a bottom layer of polar ice, or even just deteriorated over time ?.

Answer 10

Because they can't believe that a divine being created all of this. I'm not trying to argue, but there is so much evidence out there that points towards God.

You should read the book 'The Case for a Creator' by Lee Strobel. I'm currently reading it. It is a good book that is all science and it interviews top scientists and it shows how their views have changed from being atheistic to more open to the fact that there is a divine creator.