Monday, July 28, 2014



Hello everyone! How are all of you doing? We are well here, working our way through the hot and stormy summer months. One of the activities I do is teach the youth at my church creation science. The subject of the famous Miller-Urey experiment came up and so I want to enlighten all of you the same as I informed my students about this experiment. 

Some of you may remember mention of this experiment in your science classes in regards to “proof” that amino acids--the building blocks of life--had been generated from this experiment. But for those of you who don’t remember let me refresh your minds…

In 1953 Harold Urey an advisor from the University of Chicago, and his 23 year old graduate student Stanley Miller, conducted what became a famous  biochemistry experiment. “The Miller-Urey experiments involved filling a sealed glass apparatus with the gases that Opaline (a Russian scientist) had speculated were necessary to form life—namely methane, ammonia and hydrogen (to mimic the conditions that they thought were in the early atmosphere) and water vapor (to simulate the ocean). Next, while a heating coil kept the water boiling, they struck the gases in the flask with a high-voltage (60,000 volts-an excessive energy input) tungsten spark-discharge device to simulate lightning. Below this was a water-cooled condenser that cooled and condensed the mixture, allowing it to fall into a water trap below.”1

But this begs the very logical question of how did Miller know what the atmosphere was like billions of years ago? It is easy to see that Miller assumed the early earth’s atmosphere was different from today. He based his starting chemical mixture on the belief that the early earth had an atmosphere that contains no free oxygen. Why? Because it is well known in the field of science that biological molecules (specifically amino acid bonds) are destroyed in the presence of oxygen, making it impossible for life to evolve. Oxygen is a poisonous gas that oxidizes organic and inorganic materials here on earth. It would be lethal to any organisms that has no protection against it. So unless protection against oxygen “evolved” the same time that the amino acids formed, the bonds would have been immediately broken. Therefore, in order to avoid this problem, evolutionists, including Opaline, Urey and Miller,  propose that earth’s first atmosphere did not contain any freestanding oxygen. But is there any evidence at all to support this, or is it all based on the assumption that evolution must be true? No, there isn’t any evidence. There is no proof that
Earth ever had a non-oxygen atmosphere. As a matter of fact, earth’s oldest rocks contain evidence of being formed in an oxygen rich atmosphere. Recent literature suggests there is far more oxygen in the early atmosphere than anyone imagined. H-m-m….this is the first problem with Miller’s experiment. Lets go on….

“Within a few days, the water and gas mix produced a pink stain on the sides of the flask trap. As the experiment progressed and the chemical products accumulated, the stain turned deep red, then turbid. After a week, the researchers analyzed the substances in the U-shaped water trap used to collect the reaction products. The primary substances in the gaseous phase were carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen (N2). The dominant solid material was an insoluble toxic carcinogenic mixture called ‘tar’ or ‘resin’, a common product in organic reactions, including burning tobacco.”2 This is the second problem; and intelligent being altered the process. In later experiments Miller removed the tar because he knew nothing could survive in this cancer producing mixture.

But in the first experiment the tar was analyzed by chromatographic techniques that revealed a number of substances had been produced. However no amino acids were detected during this first attempt, so Miller modified the experiment (removed the carcinogenic) and tried again. “In time, trace amounts of several of the simplest biologically useful amino acids were formed—mostly glycine and alanine. The yield of glycine was a mere 1.05%, of alanine only 0.75% and the next most common amino acid produced amounted to only 0.026% of the total—so small as to be largely insignificant. In Miller’s words, ‘The total yield was small for the energy expended.’ The side group for glycine is a lone hydrogen and for alanine, a simple methyl (-CH3) group. 
“Miller was attempting to illustrate how life’s building blocks (amino acids) could have formed by natural processes. However, throughout the experiment Miller relied on years of intelligent research in chemistry. He purposely chose which gases to include and which to exclude. Next, he had to isolate the biochemicals (amino acids) from the environment he had created them in because it would have destroyed them. No such system would have existed on the so-called primitive earth. It appears Miller used intelligent design throughout the experiment rather than chance processes.”3 Problem number two continues.

In subsequent experiments Miller was able to produce amino acids. However, “producing amino acids is not the hard part. The difficult part is getting the right type and organization of amino acids. There are over 2,000 types of amino acids, but only 20 are used in life. Furthermore, the atoms that make up each amino acid are assembled in two basic shapes. These are known as left-handed and right-handed. Interestingly, all amino acids that make up proteins in living organisms are 100 percent left-handed. Right-handed amino acids are never found in proteins. If a protein were assembled with just one right-handed amino acid, the protein’s function would be totally lost. As one PhD chemist has said: Life requires polymers with all building blocks having the same ‘handedness’—proteins have only ‘left-handed’ amino acids. . . . But ordinary undirected chemistry, as is the hypothetical primordial soup, would produce equal mixtures of left- and right-handed molecules.”4  And a
introductory chemistry textbook has written in it: “All the proteins that have been investigated, obtained from animals and from plants from higher organisms and from very simple organisms—bacteria, molds, even viruses—are found to have been made of L-amino [left-handed] acids.”5 This is the third problem Miller came up with, the wrong results.

But could there be a chance, however slim, that life could evolve from non-life? “What have scientists calculated the probability of an average-size protein occurring naturally to be? Walter Bradley, PhD, materials science, and Charles Thaxton, PhD, chemistry, calculated that the probability of amino acids forming into a protein is: 4.9 x 10191. This is well beyond the laws of probability [chance] (1x1050), and a protein is not even close to becoming a complete living cell. No matter how large the environment one considers, life cannot have had a random beginning. . . . There are about two thousand enzymes, and the chance of obtaining them all in a random trial is only one part in (1020)2000 = 1040,000, an outrageously small probability that could not be faced (obtained) even if the whole universe consisted of organic soup.”6

Sadly, despite the fact that the Miller experiment did not succeed by producing only left-handed amino acids (the building blocks of life), textbooks that teach our children continue to promote the idea that life could have originated by natural processes (from non-life). “For example, the following statement from a biology textbook misleads students into thinking Miller succeeded: By re-creating the early atmosphere (ammonia, water, hydrogen and methane) and passing an electric spark (lightning) through the mixture, Miller and Urey proved that organic matter such as amino acids could have formed spontaneously. First, note the word proved. Miller and Urey proved nothing except that life’s building blocks could not form in such conditions. Second, the textbook completely ignores other evidence, which shows that the atmosphere always contained oxygen. Third, the textbook ignores the fact that Miller got the wrong type of amino acids—a mixture of left- and right-handed. The Miller experiment (and all experiments since then) failed to produce even a single biological protein by purely naturalistic processes. Only God could have begun life.”7
One other thing I would like to point out. “If we were to grant the evolutionists’ assumption of no oxygen in the original atmosphere, another fatal problem arises. Since the ozone is made of oxygen, it would not exist; and the ultraviolet rays from the sun would destroy any biological molecules. This presents a no-win situation for the evolution model. If there was oxygen, life could not start. If there was no oxygen, life could not start.”8 Problem number four. Wouldn’t that be great to see this information in our public schools!

Until next time,
Willow Dressel

This week in the night skies; for the northern hemisphere; “Friday, August 1. At dusk this evening, the Moon forms the lower-right end of a very long, curving line of celestial objects. Counting to the Moon's upper left, these are Spica, Mars, and Saturn. This day is Lammas Day or Lughnasadh, one of the four traditional "cross-quarter" days midway between the solstices and equinoxes. More or less. The actual midpoint between the June solstice and the September equinox this year comes at 2:40 a.m. August 7th Eastern Daylight Time (6:40 UT). That will be the exact midpoint of astronomical summer.”9

For the southern lats; “The Southern Delta-Aquarids meteor shower runs from from 12 July to 23rd August, peaking on Wednesday July the 30th. The number of meteors you will see depends on how high the radiant is above the horizon, and how dark your sky is. This shower is fairly faint, with the highest rate of around a meteor every 4 minutes.”10 


No comments:

Post a Comment