Intelligent Design Origin Of Life

So life on Earth is even older than we thought?

Spread the love

Combined with new information all the time about the great complexity of life, this is decidedly not good news for Darwinism:

Researchers analyzed a fist-sized rock from Quebec, Canada, estimated to be between 3.75 and 4.28 billion years old. In an earlier article, the team found tiny filaments, knobs and tubes in the rock which appeared to have been made by bacteria. However, not all scientists agreed that these structures — dating about 300 million years earlier than what is more commonly accepted as the first sign of ancient life — were of biological origin. Now, after extensive further analysis of the rock, the team have discovered a much larger and more complex structure — a stem with parallel branches on one side that is nearly a centimeter long — as well as hundreds of distorted spheres, or ellipsoids, alongside the tubes and filaments. The researchers say that, while some of the structures could conceivably have been created through chance chemical reactions, the ‘tree-like’ stem with parallel branches was most likely biological in origin, as no structure created via chemistry alone has been found like it.

University College London, “Diverse life forms may have evolved earlier than previously thought” at ScienceDaily (April 13, 2022)

One of the two papers is open access.

You may also wish to read: Neil Thomas comments on the difficulty of accommodating Darwinism to sudden origin of life. Here’s a thought: If your origin of life theory works, can we reverse engineer the conditions to produce life from non-life today? If we can’t, that doesn’t prove your theory false. After all, it is very difficult to demonstrate that something “couldn’t have” happened under any circumstances whatever. But you must now rejoin the queue in your previous place…

3 Replies to “So life on Earth is even older than we thought?

  1. 1
    kairosfocus says:

    That’s in the window for OOL I saw being discussed quite some years back, usually tied to sufficient cooling and end of bombardment era. Those who want tp argue for spontaneous OOL have a very compressed window of time, relatively speaking. Similar to the dating of Cambrian Explosion. KF

  2. 2
    BobRyan says:

    It certainly is bad news for Darwinists, not that they pay attention to bad news. When just about every new discovery disproves Darwin, there should be some breaking point.

  3. 3
    tjguy says:

    @BobRyan “It certainly is bad news for Darwinists, not that they pay attention to bad news. When just about every new discovery disproves Darwin, there should be some breaking point.”

    This is so true. Bad news never matters one bit because they just tweak the hypothesis and up their faith to accommodate anything they need to accommodate. Truly evolution is unfalsifiable.

    There should be some breaking point, but there is not and there never will be.

Leave a Reply