It was hundreds of years ago that some people first believed in some kind of spontaneous generation. In the 17th century AD, many respected men in science, such as Francis Bacon and William Harvey, accepted this theory. However, by the 19th century, Louis Pasteur and other scientists seemed to have dealt a fatal blow when they used experiments to prove that life could only come from life that already existed. Even so, evolution theory still has to assume that a long time ago, microorganisms must have evolved naturally from non-living things.
The new theory of spontaneous generation
Regarding the starting point of life, an overview of the currently popular set of evolutionary concepts can be found in the book " The Selfish Gene" written by Richard Dawkins. He guessed that the earth's atmosphere was originally a mixture of carbon dioxide, methane, ammonia and water. Energy from sunlight, perhaps plus energy from lightning and volcanic eruptions, causes those simple compounds to break apart and then recombine into the various amino acids . Different amino acids gradually accumulate in the sea and then merge into protein-like compounds. It is said that by the end, the ocean became an "organic soup" but still devoid of life.
According to Dawkins's description, then "a very special molecule was accidentally produced"-this molecule has the ability to reproduce on its own. Although he admitted that such an accident was extremely unlikely, he insisted that such a thing must have happened. Similar molecules clump together, and then, by a highly unlikely accident, they are surrounded by a protective film of other protein molecules, . He claimed that the first living cell formed on its own in this way.
At this point, readers will probably understand Dawkins's comment in the preface: "When reading this book, you should read it as if it is almost a science fiction novel." However, people who read this type of book know that this feature is not Dawkins'. unique. Most other evolutionary treatises brush aside in a few words the serious difficulty of explaining how life emerged from nothing. For example, William Thorpe, professor of zoology at the University of Cambridge, told a group of scientists: "In the past ten or fifteen years, there have been many specious speculations and discussions published in an attempt to explain the origin of life, but these articles are all naive. There is no weight to speak of. In fact, there is no progress in solving the difficult problem now. "
The explosion of knowledge in recent years has only widened the gap between living and non-living things. Even the earliest known single-cell organisms turned out to be bafflingly complex. "The big challenge in biology is finding a simple starting point," say astronomers Fred Hoyle and Chandler Wickmaxing. "The fossil remains of ancient organisms found in rocks do not show a simple starting point. ... So the theory of evolution lacks a sound basis." The more knowledge there is, the harder it becomes to explain how incredibly complex microorganisms could happen to metamorphose.
According to the concept of evolution, the main stages leading to the occurrence of life are as follows:
(1) With a suitable primitive atmosphere.
(2) There is a certain concentration of organic soup in the ocean, containing the "simple" molecules necessary for life.
(3) These molecules in turn form various proteins and nucleotides (complex compounds).
(4) These substances are combined to obtain a film.
(5) developed a set of genetic code and began to produce similar species.
Are these stages consistent with testable facts?
Primitive Atmosphere
In 1953, Stanley Miller discharged electricity in an "atmosphere" composed of a mixture of hydrogen, methane, ammonia and water vapor. As a result, several of the many types of amino acids that now exist to make up proteins were formed. However, if life is to exist, it requires 20 kinds of amino acids, and Miller only formulated 4 kinds. More than 30 years later, scientists still cannot fully produce the 20 essential amino acids in a generally feasible environment.
Miller assumed that Earth's original atmosphere was similar to the air in his experimental bottles. Why? The reason was as he and a companion later put it: "All biologically noteworthy compounds can be synthesized only in the absence of free oxygen in the atmosphere." However, other evolutionists argued that There was indeed oxygen in the atmosphere at that time. Hitchin pointed out the dilemma of the theory of evolution: "If there is oxygen in the air, the first amino acid will never be formed; if there is no oxygen, the amino acid will be completely destroyed by cosmic rays."
The fact is that any need Attempts to determine the nature of Earth's original atmosphere can only be based on guesswork and assumptions. No one is sure what it looks like.
Can an “organic soup” be formed?
What are the chances that the amino acids that are said to be formed in the atmosphere fall down and melt into an "organic soup" in the ocean? Absolutely not. The energy that splits simple molecules in the atmosphere just accelerates the decomposition of any complex amino acids produced by metabolization. Interestingly, when Miller tried to discharge electricity in the "atmosphere", he immediately led the four formed amino acids away from the vicinity of the electric spark, so that the amino acids could survive. If the amino acid is left there, the electricity will break it down.
But what if the amino acids somehow reach the ocean without being destroyed by the atmosphere's damaging ultraviolet rays? "There won't be enough energy below the water's surface to stimulate further chemical reactions," Hitchin explains. "Water always prevents more complex molecules from being produced."
So, as soon as the amino acids enter the water, they must come out immediately, otherwise they will not form. Larger molecules were unable to evolve into proteins that would have contributed to the creation of life. But as soon as the amino acids leave the water, they are attacked again by the destructive ultraviolet light! "In other words," Hitchen pointed out, "in the process of life's evolution, the theoretical chance of getting past this relatively easy first hurdle [obtaining amino acids] is already very slim."
Although commentators often assert that life is It occurs naturally in the ocean, but the water itself simply doesn't contribute to the necessary chemical reactions. Chemist Richard Dixon explains: “It therefore seems unlikely that polymerization [the joining of small molecules to form larger molecules] would have occurred in the watery environment of the primordial ocean, where water favors depolymerization [large molecules]. "Fragmentation into small molecules] rather than polymerization." Biochemist George Wald agrees, saying: "Natural dissipation is much more likely than natural synthesis and therefore proceeds more rapidly." This means that accumulating organic soup is impossible! Wald considers this "our [evolutionists'] most difficult problem."
But there is another thorny problem that attacks the theory of evolution. Don’t forget that there are over 100 types of amino acids, but only 20 are required for biological proteins. In addition, there are two major types of amino acids: some molecules are "right-handed" and some are " left-handed ". If amino acids were formed by chance, as in a hypothetical organic soup, they would most likely be half right-handed and half left-handed. So far, there is no reason why any one is better suited to constitute living things. However, all 20 amino acids that make up biological proteins are left-handed! All in red, all The right kind, the grains exactly where they were meant to be - could it be chance?
In the case of random changes, how can it be possible that only the necessary amino acids are combined in the soup? Physicist Bernard said: "We must admit that this problem...remains the most difficult to explain in biological structure." He concluded: "Perhaps we will never be able to explain it." 
