(May 31, 2014 at 9:09 am)vodkafan Wrote: Hi , I have only a layman's knowledge of evolution and have a few questions that nobody has ever been able to answer, hoping some knowledgable folks here might help me out.
1. I know that the exact mechanism of how life started is not yet known. What seems certain though is that it started surprisingly soon after the earth got created, life was just busting out all over. My question is this: obviously conditions must still be OK for life, otherwise we would be a dead planet. So why is new life not busting out spontaneously all over so we can see it happening?
The conditions then were radically different than the conditions now.
For instance, there was no free oxygen in the atmosphere or dissolved in the oceans.
The conditions now are not suited to abiogenesis - organic molecules that form will get consumed or broken down.
Quote:2. It seems to me that there is a sort of drive towards more complexity. Why is this so? Or am I wrong? I mean, Viruses and Bacteria and Archea are successful ubiquitous organisms. What made them develop into more complex forms of more and more complexity, inventing sex and self awareness, intelligence along the way and all, until eventually we get to Mila Kunis?
There is no drive toward complexity per se.
If you start with single-celled organisms, where is there to go except more complex?
Many organisms are very simple and have been so for billions of years.
Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
