The “evolution” of non living matter into living organisms is called “abiogenesis”Abiogenesis - WikipediaAs indicated in the Wikipedia article, there is no single accepted theory of abiogenesis. Different theories concentrate on various aspects of life and propose (more or less) plausible explanations for some aspects of life.“Clay theory” postulates that self-replication started with unorganic materials and the organic molecules later hijacked the process.The idea that life began as clay crystals is 50 years oldClay-armored bubbles may have formed first protocells: Minerals could have played a key role in the origins of lifeOther theories concentrate on self-replicating RNA molecules or on the evolution of the membrane. Some materials for further reading:What is the origin of life on Earth?Origin of life emerged from cell membrane bioenergeticsCoevolution of metabolic networks and membranes: the scenario of progressive sequestrationPossibly the most intriguing is the idea that abiogenesis indeed developed along several independent paths, and that the first living cells are a result of a pre-life “cooperation” where membranes provided a protective environment for the self replicating molecules.If this idea is true, it would imply that “cooperation” model of survival has been around since the very start of the life.
Hey, Christians, why do you believe the Bible is error-free, when evolution disproves creationism?
The evidence for evolution is and has been interpreted from a Philosophical and ideological Bias, THAT alone destroys it, They employ a False Dichotomy, meaning the evidence HAS to be this or that But IT cannot be God, In The series of Below Listed Videos, Lee Stroble a FORMER ATHEIST Honestly and Objectively did his own research without the influence of a pre-set world view and Contaminated by a Hostile anti christian Philosophy and ideology. I suggest watching them from an Unemotional Objective point of view and consider the Possibility of the fact that Evolution teachers have lied to you for More Philosophical reasons than for Pure truth of Science, Ohh I know, some people will answer with all these Long winded answers trying to sound all smart with walls of texts and links and think if they sound intelligent it has Validity, Fact is it doesn't, Don't be fooled by high-sounding words from Fools, Eternity is a Long Time to be wrong about this The Case for a Creator (Chapter 1 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYLHxcqJmoM The Case for a Creator (Chapter 2 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6raodW5Ypt0&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 3 of 10) The Negatve Evidence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKoiivfe_mo&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 4 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUC9drrEAVU&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 5 of 10) The evidence of Cosmology http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pP8ENlWfRk&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 6 of 10) The evidence of Physics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iwzzR0lUKw&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 7 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MVDiNl7bBM&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 8 of 10) The evidence of Biological Machines http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs5wGFbkb40&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 9 of 10) The evidence of Biological information http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CamNoA6Cfjc&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 10 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idxRxIrybBs&feature=related
Hey, Christians, why do you believe the Bible is error-free, when evolution disproves creationism?
The evidence for evolution is and has been interpreted from a Philosophical and ideological Bias, THAT alone destroys it, They employ a False Dichotomy, meaning the evidence HAS to be this or that But IT cannot be God, In The series of Below Listed Videos, Lee Stroble a FORMER ATHEIST Honestly and Objectively did his own research without the influence of a pre-set world view and Contaminated by a Hostile anti christian Philosophy and ideology. I suggest watching them from an Unemotional Objective point of view and consider the Possibility of the fact that Evolution teachers have lied to you for More Philosophical reasons than for Pure truth of Science, Ohh I know, some people will answer with all these Long winded answers trying to sound all smart with walls of texts and links and think if they sound intelligent it has Validity, Fact is it doesn't, Don't be fooled by high-sounding words from Fools, Eternity is a Long Time to be wrong about this The Case for a Creator (Chapter 1 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYLHxcqJmoM The Case for a Creator (Chapter 2 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6raodW5Ypt0&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 3 of 10) The Negatve Evidence http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKoiivfe_mo&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 4 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUC9drrEAVU&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 5 of 10) The evidence of Cosmology http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pP8ENlWfRk&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 6 of 10) The evidence of Physics http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1iwzzR0lUKw&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 7 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MVDiNl7bBM&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 8 of 10) The evidence of Biological Machines http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fs5wGFbkb40&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 9 of 10) The evidence of Biological information http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CamNoA6Cfjc&feature=related The Case for a Creator (Chapter 10 of 10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idxRxIrybBs&feature=related
Did humans really evolve from apes?
Sigh. Here we go again. >>>>did humans really evolve from apes? Yep, we evolved from apes and we are still apes. Humans are one of the 5 living species of great apes. >>>>If humans evolved from apes and humans have so many races Humans only have one race. There is no biological basis to racial categorisation. Any two chimpanzee tribes show far greater genetic variation than exists between an Eskimo and a Watusi, or between a Swede and a Phillipino. >>> then why do the original apes not have the same race types !! How do you know what racial types the original apes had? Our immediate ape ancestor was Homo erectus. How do you know what races H. erectus had? You quite clearly don’t have a clue about human evolution. Humans didn’t evolve from any species of LIVING ape. We evolved, via several intermediate species, from a common ancestor that we shared with the chimps. Even further back and with even more intermediate species we share a common ancestor with the gorilla and so forth. We have no idea what if any races those intermediate species did or did not have.
Did humans really evolve from apes?
Sigh. Here we go again. >>>>did humans really evolve from apes? Yep, we evolved from apes and we are still apes. Humans are one of the 5 living species of great apes. >>>>If humans evolved from apes and humans have so many races Humans only have one race. There is no biological basis to racial categorisation. Any two chimpanzee tribes show far greater genetic variation than exists between an Eskimo and a Watusi, or between a Swede and a Phillipino. >>> then why do the original apes not have the same race types !! How do you know what racial types the original apes had? Our immediate ape ancestor was Homo erectus. How do you know what races H. erectus had? You quite clearly don’t have a clue about human evolution. Humans didn’t evolve from any species of LIVING ape. We evolved, via several intermediate species, from a common ancestor that we shared with the chimps. Even further back and with even more intermediate species we share a common ancestor with the gorilla and so forth. We have no idea what if any races those intermediate species did or did not have.