It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Abiogenesis, creation, and natural selection

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:10 AM
How did life originate? Most people believe that it began with a process called abiogenesis, the development of living organisms from nonliving mater. According to this belief a very simple life form came into existence and over millions of year its descendants changed through the process of evolution to produce the large variety of life that exists today.

Not everyone believes in abiogenesis and evolution. Some people believe the Bible’s account of how life originated; it was created by God only a few thousand years ago.

Believers in abiogenesis and creation both agree that new varieties of life are constantly being produced by a process called natural selection. An examination of how this process works might show whether abiogenesis or creation is the most likely starting point for it.

When some individuals are better adapted to their environment than others they are more likely to survive and produce offspring. If members of a species are found in a variety of different environments the characteristics that aid survival may be different in different areas and over time the organisms in each location will come to differ from each other as well as from the parent species.

Perhaps the most obvious example of natural selection is the many breeds of dogs that are all descended from a common ancestor. Some breeds are the result of deliberate breeding by people who wanted dogs that had specific characteristics. This is artificial selection rather than natural selection but it works the same way; dogs having the desired characteristic are allowed to reproduce but others are not.

The selection process is similar to what a sculptor does when he makes a statue out of a block of marble; he cuts away all of the unwanted parts of the marble but doesn’t add any material from outside. Natural selection works by the elimination of unwanted or undesirable genes. No new genes are produced. The common ancestor of dogs must have possessed all the the genetic information that is found in all breeds of dogs. This process goes back further; dogs, wolves, foxes, coyotes, and jackals have a common ancestor that possessed greater genetic diversity.

There is no way this process could have started with a simple one celled organism. (I mean simple in comparison with the life that exists today; even the simplest form of life is extremely complex.) Natural selection wouldn’t work because there would be too little to select from; it would be like a sculptor trying to make a large statue out of a grain of sand.

But what about the Bible’s account of creation?

And God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds—livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds.” And it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds and the livestock according to their kinds, and everything that creeps on the ground according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:24-25 ESV

God created different kinds of life. If each of these kinds had a large gene pool with the potential for producing many different varieties of descendants their creation would lead to the process of natural selection we see today.

We aren’t told how many kinds there were but the number was small enough for Noah to take a pair of each kind onto the ark. Some people don’t believe the flood occurred because the ark wouldn’t have been big enough for all of the varieties of life that exist today. When you take the results of natural selection into account you can see that the number of animals Noah needed was very small.

The term natural selection was first used by Charles Darwin in Origin of Species, which was published in 1859. Our knowledge of genetics began with experiments performed by Gregor Mendel. The results of these experiments weren’t published until after his death in 1884 so Darwin knew nothing about them when he did the research for his book.

Darwin saw natural selection taking place but because he didn’t understand how heredity works he misinterpreted what he saw. He thought that the process produced completely new characteristics and therefore was evidence that his theories about the origin of life were true. Today almost everyone shares this belief and few people realize that the things we have learned about genetics since then have produced evidence that the belief isn’t true. ection-campaign
edit on 30-4-2013 by theophilus40 because: Post link

posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:25 AM
Great post.

Cue the pseudo- scientists to tell you that you are a moron for hypothesizing on an unseen event differently than they in 3...2...1...

posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 11:26 AM
reply to post by theophilus40

Yes the genetic code has much more variety in some animals than others, for example the Giraffe is a unique mammal, no variation there. But with the dog there is hundreds of variations in both size and colors and facial features. Those us that believe in creation understand some creatures had that put into their genetic make up.
In many ways dogs are like humans for genetic variety. And having environments shape the variations over time.

But dogs are still dogs and humans are still humans.

posted on Apr, 30 2013 @ 12:31 PM
The number of dog breeds has nothing to do with natural selection and everything to do with humans cross-breeding them.

Other than that, I agree.

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:00 AM
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Natural Selection is a forced selection due to Nature, Cross-Breeding is also a forced selection by Humans.

They are the same. Humans just make it go faster by implementing artificial pressures.

Not All Cross-breeds survive thus, the "natural selection" part is still there.

posted on May, 1 2013 @ 10:04 AM
reply to post by Blue_Jay33

The problem here is we are always changing... a 200,000 yrs is nothing in the big picture.

Dogs was not always a dog, this is probably most observed evolution... it was a wolf. Similar to Humans were not always humans, we looked similar to Neanderthal and other humanoids.

In about 100,000 yrs, if we continue this technology depended living, we might produce children that are born with defect but still survive to pass the genes(thx to technology), so over all human value would be a reduced one.

posted on May, 2 2013 @ 02:34 PM
reply to post by theophilus40

I believe the latest scientific models, and the largest Christian denominations do as well. The Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and most mainline Protestant Churches have no issues with the Big Bang Theory, the Age of the Earth, or the Evolution of man, only a very small minority of fundamentalist Christians are "YEC" young earth creationists, just like only a small minority of Muslims believe in Jihad and believe all infidels should be killed....

Check out this wonderful website by a brilliant Biblical Anthropologist, also Dr. Hugh Ross is a brilliant Astrophysicist and Christian Apologetic who has done some tremendous work in bringing Christian faith up to speed with 21st century scientific thought!

God bless everyone!

new topics

top topics


log in