Primordial Soup

So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.  God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.”  And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.

And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.”  And it was so.  God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.

  • Genesis 1:21-25

What they teach our children these days is that all life on earth started in the form of a primordial soup, or it is sometimes called a prebiotic broth.  This theory was first postulated by Alexander Oparin in 1924.  He only published in Russian.  J. B. S. Haldane, independently, made the same claim in 1929.  Both are credited.  The concept was that you could get a soup made of simple organic compounds.  Add energy from lightning or another source and get the compounds in the soup to create something more complex.  Then over millions or billions of years these more complex organic compounds could create life.  Then evolution takes over to create everything on the earth.

As Mark Lowry said when he “first met an atheist,” he said that the atheist had a whole lot more faith than he did.  The atheist believes everything in the previous paragraph happening by shear chance or just dumb luck, but the Christian believes that God said it and it just happened.

The famous Miller-Urey experiment took methane, ammonia, and hydrogen with an absence of any oxygen.  These chemicals, mixture inside a sealed apparatus, were exposed to thaw – freeze cycles and electrical sparks to simulate lightning, which added energy.  They produced some amino acids.  Not life, just amino acids, something slightly more complex than what they had at the beginning.  In The Case for Creation, Lee Strobel writes about how the grand experiment to create “life” met limited success, but only once.  All efforts to repeat that success have failed.

Strange.  I spent many hours in chemistry labs in college.  Once, I created the substance that the lab proctor wanted to be created in half the allotted lab time.  No one else in the class was close to completion.  I took my test tube to the proctor.  He examined it.

I said, “See.  I have succeeded.”

The proctor dumps the test tube contents into the drain.  He rinsed the test tube with water and handed it back to me.  He then said, “No, you have not succeeded.  Nothing in science can be proven by one success.  You have to prove that you can establish the same conditions and produce the same result, over and over again.”  I went away defeated, but by the end of the allotted lab time, I had repeated the success, while over half the class barely completed the experiment once.

Yet, Miller-Urey (one the teacher and the other the student) are lifted upon the shoulders of all the evolutionists in the world as the great conquerors.  But, in any other scientific endeavor, repeatability is an absolute requirement.  Thus, in “real” science the Miller-Urey experiment is an unmitigated failure, but that seems to never be reported.

The evil in this world that wishes to disprove the Bible and God will use any experimental mistake and turn it into fact.

On the lab day that I mentioned above, I was successful.  I have had failures.  On a different day, I was unable to reproduce my success on one experiment.  The proctor came over and tapped me on the shoulder.  He said, “You will be unable to repeat your success when you do not properly clean the flask.”

I went to the sink.  I scrubbed all my flasks carefully.  I then poured acetone into each flask and stirred.  Acetone will quickly absorb the residual water (which might have impurities).  Once you pour out the acetone, the resulting film of the acetone mixture quickly evaporates.  Of course, acetone is now considered a hazardous chemical.  Because it likes to absorb water, it defats the skin, causing irritation.  Prolonged exposure, for the same reason, can damage the lungs.  I miss acetone.  It had such a delightful aroma.  When you went in a laboratory and smelled the acetone, your thought was “This is Chemistry!”

But, back to the Miller-Urey experiment.  If they could never repeat their success, could there have been a film of amino acid in the flask before they added the methane, ammonia, and hydrogen?  Were the methane, ammonia, and hydrogen pure when they were added?  Was everything added to the flask void of all amino acids?  We’ll never know.

One big reason for repeatability being a requirement in science is to avoid a contaminated sample.

So, where does all this leave us?

Evolution and the theory that life emerged from primordial soup have not been disproven, even by destroying the credibility of their “landmark experiment,” but neither has the creation story in Genesis 1.  We are left with a requirement for belief and faith in either case.  God promises us eternal life if we believe in Him and trust Him.  Evolution promises us nothing, a void and emptiness.

Soli Deo Gloria.  Only to God be the Glory.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: