I.SCIENCE C. Theories 4. The Origin of Life b.

30 Jan

Dinosaur Cave Painting

Is it real? A cave painting, or rock wall painting of a dinosaur? It is one of several examples of chronological incongruities I have seen. Don’t answer yet. What about the rock below? Is it a life and water-containing meteor “blasted off” the surface of Mars? What will determine our conclusions?

We have spent a little time discussing the Origins of Life as believed by the current theoretical science, specifically that predominant theory which says that animate life arose from inanimate life. Perhaps unwittingly, those who have made and continue to make the claims– such as we have heard about the primordial slime –have in essence ignored the vast chasm that is the difference between a rock, element or mineral, and the most minute example of life. The chief of our scientists, we have learned thus far, have somehow put their common sense, not to mention the Genera of Being, on hold, ignored all the obvious differences between living things and rocks, and without providing for the differences, have asserted that life comes from that which is without.

I want to take one moment to answer an objection that is very frequently used by the theoretical scientists when they are asked to answer for their claims. The answer given, usually by them, is show us a better idea, or show us a better theory, and we will change; give us better, more accurate measuring tools, and we will use them.

But why must critics of this theory do any such thing? After all, if we consider the evidence, the saga we know as Evolution, and its twin, the Big Bang, are so laughably incorrect, or at best incomplete, that they have had no business being the accepted scientific theory at all. They, let’s be clear, for anyone who wants to know the Truth, need to supply better evidence than they have. Being grandfathered-in is no reason to abide by bad science, any more than a nation should, just out of stubbornness, continue a war they shouldn’t have been involved with in the first place. All we need to do is show evidence that our, well, current policy is no good, and that ought to be more than enough to end the war.

But we know it’s not always like this. A scientific theory, just like a nation in a bad or unjust war, is reluctant to admit its errors, ashamed to be red-faced by the embarrassment of having to own up to the mistakes. Indeed, both theoretical science and the Lords of War will fight tooth-and-nail to salvage their decisions, rather than let Truth illuminate the reality and learn from their mistakes.

So in anticipation of the long battle which is already underway in spheres also other than here, we need to see what other ammunition the theoretical scientists might aim at us. We need to find out if any of their salvos reveal worthy adversaries.

Not surprisingly science, perhaps sensing the impending doom of the theories Big Bang and Evolution as we now know them, has risen up and gathered their Conferences and Calls for Papers together to come up with even stranger ideas.

Erich von Daniken and the ET Theory

Erich von Daniken held my attention for quite some time back in the 70s, and today I still like to go to his web site to see what the eccentric old Swiss is coming up with these days. Long discredited by the established science, nevertheless science is indebted to him for coming up with some alternatives to the primordial slime for explaining the Origins of Life.

EvD’s work is largely based on theory prior to his, specifically Sir Francis Crick’s, the latter who co-discovered DNA. But he was not without his source, and most critics today think that Crick’s Birth of Life theory was found first in the Swede Svente Arrhenius’ book Worlds in the Making. Crick’s seeding theory, which we will soon encounter below, since 1981 has been the main source of that theory.

Loosely, and because he is to beliefs in an “extraterrestrial beginning to Life on Earth” what PT Barnum was to the concept of the Circus, I will summarize von Daniken’s work only. As stated, he was primarily concerned with offering the theory that Life on Earth is best explained by the interference of advanced civilizations that have visited here from far, far away. Aliens, to be precise, are given credit for the human ability to do everything from build fires, to construct pyramids, and perhaps to even exist at all. Chariots of the Gods, his most famous work which sold millions of copies and continues to move very well, as the title implies, was concerned with offering up the particular suggestion that the historical tales of gods are better understood if the gods be considered extra-terrestrials. When the apparition appears to Moses and offers the 10 Commandments, this Yahweh or YWH is not really a deity. He is an alien from another galaxy.

That he is still a fun read, and subject to research, is beyond argument. Those who have, however, studied Von Daniken’s claims, have for the most part dismissed them as untrue. I think the idea, as Carl Sagan thought, is possible, but not likely, and in any case requires more proofs. But what is important to note about von Daniken is that he is considered in scientific circles to be a science fiction writer. See the above sources and also here and here. Better to try to find a respected scientist who believes about the whole Danikenesque “ancient astronauts” theory, which I have been unable to do. That he is considered science fiction, or fantasy, and the reasons for that, is what is important here. Von Daniken will soon come up again in our study.


“Seeding,” or “Panspermia”

No, this section is not about erotica or gardening. Seeding, or the general theory that life on Earth came from space, takes many forms. As science admits, all species of Life investigated on this planet so far use a similar genetic code, indicating a common thread, a “lifeness” to all Life, a lifeness yet to be explained. Unable to account adequately (despite the various attempts we have been studying) for the appearance and even abundance of these genetic dispositions, we find common to all the renditions of this theory a belief in an outside interference of the cosmic order, and with the Earth, by Life originating beyond Earth. This is where we get the DNA.

Well how does it happen? Because aliens are anathema to science (at least, openly; in reality, trying to find them is what is churning the astronomy machines), most versions of this theory attribute the seeds of life reaching us via meteorite, comet, or some other celestial object. Containing the seeds or, as some have said, water as well, the Earth did begin to populate itself and animate the non-living materials on the planet.

If you take the time to click on that last source or here you will be treated to an example of the type of fairy-tale conjuring that goes even into a claim like “there was water in the meteorite,” or “this is a meteorite from Mars.”


This is the famous ALH84001, “meteorite” found in Antarctica in 1984 during a, well, a meteor-hunting expedition (op.cit). What has been said about this rock, and several others like it (almost all of them igneous rocks), is that it is a meteorite, and it fell to Earth from space. Its alleged origin is from the planet Mars. Less controversial is that it was about 5 pounds heavy and about 6 inches long and shaped, well, like a rock.

Because of its “fusion crust” this rock is classified as a meteorite. This crust on the surface of a rock is shiny and while it does resemble certain obsidian rocks here, the shine is a process of the rock burning and melting as it falls through the atmosphere.. That there can be and are meteorites we have no doubt. That we can set out on an expedition and find one, especially like this one, is less believable. For this is no ordinary meteorite.

Read the papers here, and see if the reasoning given by the science convinces you. This source, and several others, even claim as if it is plain fact that we have discovered “traces of water” on Mars. What they mean of course is water vapor, and more specifically on Mars, humidity. Here is a chart of the Viking probe’s analysis of Mars’ atmosphere (NASA):

Mars’ atmospheric measurements (from Viking)
Composition 95.32%
carbon dioxide
carbon monoxide
water vapor
neon, krypton, xenon,
ozone, methane
Surface pressure 1-9 millibars, depending on altitude;
average 7 mb

As you can see, there is no Hydrogen. Whatever it is that is causing the humidity, named above probably incorrectly as “water vapor,” can then not possibly be water as we know it. Water without hydrogen is merely Oxygen.

Undoubtedly, I will be belittled as ignorant on this issue, because really I am, but I admit it. I will be told I do not know about things like “water-ice” and “carbon-dioxide fog.” But how misleading is it to use the term “water” for a molecular arrangement that does not use any hydrogen? Don’t blame the atmosphere as the reason why no rain falls on Mars. No rain falls on Mars because there is no Hydrogen, and so, no water.

Now might Mars at one time have “been alive”? Quite possibly, even a short time ago. But might it not just now be coming to Life, as well? Surely! The difference, as we have already discussed, hinges on the dating methods used (unfortunately also, the qualifying words we use like “possible” and “might”…). And when it comes to geology, we have already seen how they throw billions of years around like so many microseconds. And astronomers and cosmologists, well they will not be outdone, and so are already offering conjecture as to the what Mars’ atmosphere was like—billions of years ago.

All this to say that the reason this meteorite is so special is because it is said to contain water and life. Well, kind of.  If this is to be evidence of seeding from non-alien means, it leaves a lot to be desired. Consider this:

[They say they know…]”…some kind of liquid flowed through ALH 84001 and deposited rounded globules of carbonate minerals. The possible martian fossils are in these carbonate globules.”

Now the time given when this fossil supposedly partook of martian life is about 3.6 billion years ago. In reality, and still in fear of the dating methods, we can make the same claim and say it happened 2 thousand years ago. The meteorite from Mars, if that be what it is, could have come into contact with water and life while on Earth. For that matter, it could be a rock native to Earth. What is the evidence for these claims?

fossilized martian fossil

Yes, this is the evidence, or the bulk of it, for fossil Martians. Let me stress this is from the surface of the meteorite. This image is from NASA, and an electron microscope was used to take it. Now here is the conclusion:

“…the ingredients required for the emergence of a primitive life may have been present on the surface of Mars” (ibid.)

A scientific statement? Well the ingredients required for a primitive tuna sandwich may have been present on Venus.

Seeding, or anything like it, is surely a possibility that might explain the origin of Life on Earth. But to be fair, we must say that it is no more of a possibility than Erich von Daniken’s explanation.

The scientific theories as to the Origin of Life on Earth are varied, of little merit and less use. They rest on other theoretical science such as we have touched upon. A conspiracy theorist could have a field day elucidating the Kabal science seems to exhibit, in its protecting itself no matter the cost to common sense, in its constant backward-quest of doing present science to prove prior science. Only a science so unsure of its own conclusions could waste so much time, money, and energy on stretching and building on the slightest evidence in support of standing theories. And there is no agreement, except on one front: all the varied theorists of Evolution and the Big Bang, to a man, stand united in their war against anything that mentions God or a purposive design.

I am going to move the Outline a bit more and next tackle the issue of Consensus in the Scientific Community. Probably this will be more beneficial at this point, before we dig into the steel-reinforced granite that is the edifice of the Theory of Evolution, rather than after.


Tags: , , , ,

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: