UCTAA churchlight

Site Search via Google

Discussion 2 to Meditation 604
Emergence of Life

by: George Rush

To add to this discussion (or any other,) please use the Contact form.

Yes, I am suggesting that the most basic single-cell life form - presumably, a prokaryote, like blue-green algae - might be "irreducibly complex". Of course, a prokaryote can be taken apart and analyzed - it's not "irreducible" in that sense. But the way we're using the term, it means the prokaryote can't be explained by evolution from simpler life forms. It's probably the best candidate for "irreducible complexity" - much better than wings, eyes or flagellae. Apparently the only possible evolutionary explanation involves "protobionts"; they've been studied for decades with little success. But I'm only suggesting this possibility. Someone may show how prokaryotes evolved from protobionts, one of these decades. It's also possible some alien race seeded the planet four billion years ago with proto-prokaryotes. At this time we have no way of knowing. They couldn't have evolved from mycoplasma, by the way, since mycoplasma emerged long after prokaryotes. As for eukaryotes, I'm assuming they also evolved from prokaryotes.

I agree that Dawkin's Anthropic Principle explanation is very, very weak. There has to be either an evolutionary explanation, or alien intervention. The anthropic principle, and its infinitely multiplied universes with randomized physical properties, is unscientific.

Don't forget the other, and main, issue I raised: Dawkin's treatment of consciousness. Regarding prokaryotes I freely admit the possibility of an evolutionary explanation; although we seem to be nowhere near it yet, there are various promising avenues. However no scientist has the slightest idea how consciousness can be explained.