James Tour: The Origin of Life Has Not Been Explained

Life Cannot Create Itself
From Non-living Matter

by James Tour  – Synthetic Organic Scientist

Darwin admitted in 1859: “Science as yet throws no light on the far higher problem of the essence or origin of life.” Today, synthetic organic chemistry confirms that life cannot create itself from non-living matter, leaving evolution without a scientifically, verifiable starting point.

Creation, Day Two” by Nathan Greene, ©, All Rights Reserved, Used By Permission.
  • Chemical Evolution Cross-examined

  • Atomic bomb explosions destroy life and matter.
    It’s unproven conjecture that a “Big Bang” cosmic explosion creates something from nothing.

    Without chemical evolution being proven as absolute fact, any theory of self-creating biological evolution lacks scientific substance.

    Explosions witnessed on Planet Earth rip matter apart, strewing shredded fragments of rubble, helter-skelter in disorganized trash heaps. The atomic bomb’s devastation changed world history. So the inevitable question:

    If the atom can be split by humans, can the sciences of physics and mathematics devise methodologies that could explain reversing the process so as to successfully create atoms from invisible particles?”

  • The atomic bomb explosion over Hiroshima did not organize new matter.

    “Big Bangers” speculate somewhere in the deep-time past, within the amorphous haze of a subatomic world of “quantum foam,” a cataclysmic explosion of a hot, dense, minuscule “dot,” no bigger than a period at the end of a sentence, activated a chain reaction that allegedly self-created every star and planet in the cosmos. Unproven theory assigned the minuscule particle the task of giving mass to enough matter to eventually decorate our universe with today’s stars and planets.

    When and where did the mysterious tiny “dot” originate?
    If an explosion split atoms, could a “big bang” create elements?
    If atomic elements did not exist, what triggered the explosion?

  • Tied to an interpretation of quantum mechanics, the “Big Bang” hypothesis portrays a magic moment having occurred spontaneously 13.82 billion years before the present. Side-stepping any attempt to picture conditions prior to the conjectured explosion, the ancient date is viewed as a kick-off point for the formation of protons, neutrons, and electrons, which launched an inflation that allegedly created the atoms for all matter composing our universe.

    So, when, where, and how did the minuscule “dot” itself originate?
    Did cosmic space exist before the dot?
    If not, what existed if there was nothing?

  • The Solar System displays a visual symphony of mathematical balance. Suspended in space, without cables or foundations, Earth’s “Pale Blue Dot” moves in three directions simultaneously—spinning clockwise on its axis, to the east; orbiting the sun in a precisely predictable circuit; and floating in cosmic space in sync with the other System components.

    Did laws of physics pre-exist the “Big Bang?” If not then, when?
    How did a single, exploding “tiny dot,” produce millions of galaxies?
    What carves the paths and powers floating chunks of space matter?

  • The “Unreachable Something”

    Something preceded the Big Bang, and that ‘something’ is unreachable to our science…We don’t know what caused the Big Bang…going back to the Big Bang is outside the reach of any civilization.Amir D. Aczel, Why Science Does Not Disprove God (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 2014) 249-251.

    When you squeeze the entire universe into an infinitesimally small, but stupendously dense package, at a certain point, our laws of physics simply break down. They just don’t make sense anymore.Brian Greene, Prof of mathematics and physics, Columbia University, as quoted by Carl Warner, Living Fossils, Evolution: the Grand Experiment, (Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Press, 2008) 4.

    There is little direct evidence that inflation actually took place…It is a beautiful idea that fits snugly with standard cosmology…We don’t know for sure if inflation happened…In a way, we are still as confused as ever about how the universe began.Peter Coles, “Boomtime,” New Scientist, March 3, 2007.

  • Biological evolution debunked

  • A Life-friendly Environment

    Without a controlled environment, with food, water and oxygen “trucked” in from Earth, human survival in space would be impossible.

    It takes a giant leap of faith to suggest unproven chemical evolution set in motion the cosmic convergence of conditions essential for life to exist anywhere in the universe. It takes another blind leap to believe biological evolution took over and generated life on Earth spontaneously.

    The mass, color, location, and luminosity of stars; an ideal sized moon to control Earth’s axis tilt and the inclination of earth’s orbit; and a terrestrial crust with moving tectonic plates—all combine to set the stage for life within the crosshairs of a minuscule terrestrial spot in an infinity of space.

    Almost everything about the basic structure of the universe…the fundamental laws…of physics and the initial distribution of matter and energy…is balanced on a razor’s edge for life to occur.” Michael J. Murray, Reason for the Hope Within (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1999) 48.

  • A Balanced Ecosystem

    Instead of blistering heat or deadly radiation, energy from the sun comes calibrated in a range maximizing a life-friendly environment. Sunlight also delivers a riot of kaleidoscopic colors embellishing environments as a psychological bonus. Restful sky-blues, backlighting forests of multi-hued greens define the landscape—a rainbow of accents, drenching the skyline with pastel shades of shimmering pinks, lavenders, and crimson-golds. Shifting combinations of the sun’s rays conspire to induce peace.

    Earth’s privileged ecosystem thrives on balanced land/water ratios, all nestled within a thin atmospheric envelope with delicately matched ratios of oxygen, carbon dioxide, ozone, and nitrogen. Add a dash of carbon and a touch of sulfur. Finally, bolster the formula with some nitrogen and phosphorous. Sunshine, atmosphere, electromagnetism, gravity, and a full range of elements identified on the periodic table, anchor the all-or-nothing list of absolutes. But that’s only the beginning of a life-essential base for a package of a mutually supportive co-dependent mix.

  • Life Can’t Self-create

    Absent scientific supporting evidence, while unaware a living cell had a nucleus, Charles Darwin conjectured that all plant and animal life forms evolved gradually from a single, simple living cell over millions of years. Dismantling the 200,470 words contained in the Sixth Edition of Darwin’s Origin of Species demonstrates the impossibility of his theory on steroids.

    A B C D E F G H I J K
    L M N O P Q R S T U
    V W X Y Z . : ; ? – “ ( )

    If every letter, in each word, and every punctuation mark in the book were sliced into individual bits of paper, scattered across the ground, the odds of the scraps reassembling themselves into book form seem impossible.

    Could these paper bits self-organize into book form?
    Could this English alphabet reorganize as the Origin of Species?
    Would millions of years of exposure increase possibility?

  • Stubborn Stasis

    “The number of intermediate and transitional links between all living and extinct species must have been inconceivably great…Geological research…does not yield the infinitely many fine gradations between past and present species required on the theory…If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.
    Charles Robert Darwin

    Can evolution theory identify the ancestor of the Peacock?
    Where are the “inconceivably great” number of transitional fossil links?
    Why is a giant fossil nautilus a dead ringer for its living descendant?

  • Irreducible Complexity

    To suppose that the eye…could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd to the highest degree.”
    Charles Robert Darwin

    To jump from the fragile stretch of chemical evolution into self-created life followed by gradual biological evolution leading from a simple cell up the taxonomic ladder to family, order, and class defies irreducible complexity. A partially function organ, such as an eye, would be useless.

    Unless an eye could exist as a component of a fully-formed living organism, with “Simultaneous Functionality” of an operational set of organs, life could not exist. When a heart, lung, or kidney fail, death is the likely dividend.

    The “eyes” have it!

    © Rob Hainer

  • A fossil femur from a Titanosaur, a plant eating Sauropod.

    Without the magnifying power of electron microscopes, 19th-century scientists dismissed living cells as “structureless globules of protoplasm.” Darwin lacked the faintest clue that a cell even had a nucleus, much less DNA. Evolutionists attempted to link fossils for supporting evidence.

    Fossils offered a fascinating, macro glimpse of ancient life but a distracting diversion from the micro reality of genetic relationships. Where fossil skulls of two mammals of the same species are discovered in close proximity, without DNA it’s not possible to tell which is the ancestor, or if they were even related. While descendant species may be smaller in size from fossil ancestors, stasis pervades the fossil record.

    Can evolution theory explain the origin of DNA?
    Mutations corrupt DNA but don’t deliver new genetic information.
    Neither hybridization or gene-splicing is Darwinian evolution.

  • DNA Dictates Design

    “If Darwinian style evolution happens or doesn’t happen,
    it happens or doesn’t happen genetically.” 1
    Sean Pitman

    “DNA contains the genetic blueprint of life…It gives instructions to the rest of the cell to make proteins, and it passes this same information on to the next generation…Without DNA, living organisms cannot survive.”
    Carl Werner, Evolution: the Grand Experiment
    (Green Forest, AR: New Leaf Press, 2007) 192, 193

    Francis Harry Compton Crick
    1916 – 2004

    “Francis Harry Compton Crick was a British molecular biologist, biophysicist, and neuroscientist. In 1953, he co-authored, with James Watson, the academic paper proposing the
    double helix structure of the DNA molecule.”