Examining the Theory of Abiogenesis

Caleb Mace • November 15, 2025

Examining the Theory of Abiogenesis

Where did we come from? Christians and creationists know we came from God the almighty designer about 6,000 years ago but what does science have to say? How did life get its start according to their worldview?


The textbooks say that approximately 4.5 billion years ago the Earth was basically a big flaming ball with a partially molten surface with volcanism and asteroid impacts rupturing the surface. Now, when the Earth got its first bit of water which in and of itself is a subject of debate among scientists but one of the most commonly held to theories is that 4 billion years ago when the Earth finally cooled down and was a barren rock, water rained on the Earth for hundreds of thousands or millions of years and was essentially a water world. (Evolutionists believe in a global flood, too, but their story is way off the mark…) Over time, when the rain stopped and the Earth began to dry up, life evolved in what’s known as the “primordial soup” which is a theory stating that the early Earth's atmosphere which was composed of gases like methane, ammonia, and water, was energized by lightning or ultraviolet radiation, creating a chemical reaction that formed organic molecules. These molecules, like amino acids, accumulated in the oceans, creating a "primordial soup" and out of this soup the first simple celled organisms arose. This theory is known as Abiogenesis and is science's best guess as to how life could have started on Earth. Now, as ridiculous as this all sounds there must be some sort of evidence to back up this claim right? Well, not really…   


In 1953, a pair of scientists named Stanley Miller and Harold Urey conducted an experiment named the Miller-Urey experiment, which simulated the conditions of the early Earth to see if organic compounds could form from inorganic ones. It succeeded in creating amino acids by exposing a mixture of gases (methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water) to electrical sparks, which simulated lightning. After about a week, the water in their apparatus turned a brownish-black color, and analysis showed it contained numerous organic compounds, including amino acids, which are the building blocks of proteins.


So, what did this experiment prove? That amino acids can form through natural processes? What about all of the other necessary components needed for a cell? As far as we understand it today, a basic cell has five key components (and numerous lesser components) which are amino acids, nucleotides, simple sugars like glucose for energy, lipids (fatty acids), and water. Extensive research is being conducted on this subject as cellular biologists have been attempting to crack the code for years but the more research is conducted on this subject, the more science is understanding just how much we don’t understand about cells.


So, how could all these things come together to form a single living cell in a natural, chaotic environment? In the experiment, all that the scientists were able to produce was a simple amino acid. In fact, even in recent years scientists have been attempting to make life arise from non-life through controlled experiments and after years and years of trying even with all of todays knowledge and equipment, scientists aren’t even getting close to creating a simple cell and don’t know how because the more they try, the more they discover about the true complexity of cells.

Now, science would absolutely have you believe that abiogenesis is provable and has been done but there's been absolutely zero proof to this claim. One of my favorite creationists and apologists is a man by the name of Dr. James Tour. Dr. Tour is a synthetic chemist and nanotechnologist who is actively challenging the false narratives on abiogenesis. One of my favorite quotes from him is “I build molecules for a living. I can't begin to tell you how difficult that job is. I stand in awe of God because of what he has done through his creation. My faith has been increased through my research. Only a rookie who knows nothing about science would say science takes away from faith. If you really study science, it will bring you closer to God” Dr. Tour actually made a challenge back in 2023 asking the top 10 Origin of Life researchers to solve just one of the key issues attributed with abiogenesis. After sixty days, none of the researchers were able to answer any of the issues attributed with OoL. I’ll post the link for the challenge if you want additional information on that!


The famous scientist Fred Hoyle is attributed to saying a very powerful statement on the theory saying “The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is 1 to a number with 40,000 noughts after it (1040,000).... It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” Oh, and by the way, this guy was an atheist.


Now, with all of this being said, it seems convincing to me that there is no possible chance that we could have came from natural means and that we must have been created by an intelligent designer who holds the keys to life. Think about this, when you see a building you know somebody must have built that building. It wouldn’t be logical to assume all the bricks, mortar, paint, nails, and other materials happened to all come together and form the building. Same thing goes with a car, a computer, a painting, the cellphone in your hand, everything we see around us demands design and order. The human body is the most complex machine ever built by far with everything needing to work in perfect harmony to survive or else everything falls apart.


For example, there are 100 trillion chemical signals that are happening in your body through hormones, cytokines and neurotransmitters. 37 billion cells all communicating with each other to keep everything working correctly, DNA alone is nearly 3 billion letters in code and is six feet in length in just one of your 37 billion cells! I’m just scratching the surface here; our bodies are so amazingly complex with everything working in perfect unison which demands intentional design. There is no possible way that billions of years and random mutations could have made such a perfect machine it is absolutely out of the realm of possibility. Even the great Sir Isaac Newton once said, “In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God's existence.”


In conclusion, with all of the evidence listed it would be absurd to believe that life came from natural means but so many hold on to this false narrative even with there being zero scientific proof for the theory. The complexity of life is immense and it’s not something I think we’ll ever truly understand. Every designer holds their secrets…


https://www.britannica.com/science/Miller-Urey-experiment

https://pressbooks.lib.vt.edu/introearthscience/chapter/8-earth-history/

https://www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/articles/cl44v0506glo

https://www.icr.org/content/renowned-chemist-origin-life-put-or-shut (Dr. Tour’s challenge)

The Population Issue

By Caleb Mace • December 30, 2025
The Population Issue

Examining the Geologic Column

By Caleb Mace • July 5, 2025
Examining the Geologic Column When Charles Darwin was on his way to the Galapagos Islands, he was reading a book entitled “Principles of Geology” by Charles Lyell. Now, Lyell is known as the man who coined the term geologic column and what’s known as uniformitarianism, which by definition is “the theory that changes in the earth's crust during geological history have resulted from the action of continuous and uniform processes.” Basically, this theory states that all the geologic layers in the Earth are assigned different dates based upon the fossils that have been found there, and also that places such as the Grand Canyon took millions of years to erode based upon the rock formations. This supposed “geologic column” is riddled with glaring issues that evolutionists refuse to acknowledge. Firstly, at the bottom of this supposed column we have what’s known as the Precambrian period which are the fossils from the creatures that came alive some 4.5 billion years ago all the way up to the Cenozoic period, which are the most recent fossils within the last several thousand years, according to evolutionists. While there’s no denying layers in the rock sediment, the secularist has their thinking severely misconstrued. What’s interesting to note is that the only place this “Geologic Column” can be found is in the textbooks, because every place that geologists dig, the fossils and layers turn up in a different order than in previous digs. In fact, in more than 85% of digs, the first three layers of this column show up in different layers. If the geologic column were universal, then shouldn’t the layers turn up in the same order every time? See, one of the big issues is that evolutionists like to implement circular reasoning for the geologic column, meaning that they date the fossils from the rocks and they date the rocks from the fossils. Which, in and of itself is a logical fallacy. The index fossil for the “Devonian Period” some 419-358 million years ago, is the Lobe-finned fish which later evolved into the ancestors of all land vertebrates, including amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. What’s interesting to note is that in 1938, a live coelacanth, which is a type of lobe-finned fish, was found off the shores of South Africa. How could this be possible since this animal supposedly evolved into all land vertebrates and is one of the forefathers of all living creatures? Petrified trees are found all throughout the Earth protruding through several rock layers spanning millions of years in the geologic column. Were these trees growing through hundreds of feet of sedimentary rock looking for sunlight? Did the trees stand upright for millions of years while sedimentary layers grew around them? More like these trees were quickly buried in a worldwide flood over the course of a few days/weeks. As a matter of fact, the oldest living tree today, ironically nicknamed “Methuselah” is estimated to be 4,853 years old and is located in the Inyo National Forest in California. More than likely, this is one of the first trees post-flood, which is fascinating to say the least! One of my favorite pieces of evidence against the supposed column is the Paluxy River flood that happened in the early 1930s. There was a local flood in Glen Rose, Texas that wiped clean several feet of rock layer from the Paluxy River. In this flood, many different formations were found in the limestone deposit with dinosaur and human footprints side by side. According to evolutionists, this is an impossibility because they believe that dinosaurs died millions of years ago and humans have never coexisted with dinosaurs. The formations have naturally been under much scrutiny in the scientific community; however, footprints don’t lie and act as a sort of permanent photograph. Lastly, what’s definitely worth mentioning is when evolutionists take a look at places such as the Grand Canyon, they assume that the rocks had to have taken millions of years to erode away like they are. However, the eruption of Mt. Saint Helens in 1980 turned this theory on its head when the eruption produced complex sediment layers up to 600 feet tall. It’s clear that the fossils and rock layers came as a result of a worldwide flood around 4,800 years ago. Animals that were able to get to higher ground before the flood consumed them would have been buried on top of ones who were not able to escape the first onset of floodwater. In short, the geologic column is a ridiculous theory riddled with errors and misinformation started by a man seeking to disprove the biblical account in favor of man's reasoning which never stands up to biblical truth in the end. https://www.icr.org/articles/print/81 https://www.icr.org/article/gaps-geologic-column/ https://isgenesishistory.com/what-is-the-geologic-column-from-a-creationist-perspective/

Examining Charles Darwin and the start of the evolutionary theory

By Caleb Mace • April 5, 2025
Examining Charles Darwin and the start of the evolutionary theory

Examing the Gap Theory

By Caleb Mace • March 10, 2025
Let’s examine a theory some Christians hold to called the gap theory. A man by the name of Thomas Chalmers proposed a theory in the early 19th century called the gap or the ruin and reconstruction theory that tries to fit in the supposed billions of years of history that the scientific community tells us how old the universe is and tried to make it fit into the Bible. The theory claims that after Genesis 1:1 the earth was perfect as God intended but in the time frame from verses 1 to 2 is when the fall of Lucifer happened and Satan wrestled control of the earth from God and started a revolt against him known as the pre-adamic rebellion. During this period of time is when the evolutionary process kicked off giving us the fossil records and the deep rock layers we see today. After a few billion years the earth was void as we read in verse 2 and afterwards, there were six literal days of creation. Now, as silly as this all sounds, there are some Christians who hold to this point of view to fit in what the scientific community tells us about the age of the earth to accommodate the dinosaurs, fossil records, deep rock layers, etc. The biggest piece of evidence creationists and Christians can use to refute the gap theory is by looking at Romans 5:12 where the apostle Paul writes “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:” So in this passage, we read that death first came into the world through the sin of Adam and Eve and not through evolutionary processes because it was never in God’s perfect plan for man to die but due to their disobedience God ended up cursing man to eventually grow old and die. So, if there were “billions of years of history” during these six days of creation then there must have been death prior to the fall of man in order for the evolutionary process to run its course. This piece of evidence alone is enough to make the gap theory heretical to scripture and if the gap theory were true then Christians would still be left to answer all of the glaring errors that the gap and evolutionary theory presents claiming billions of years. Secondly, the rock layers and fossil record can easily be explained by Noah’s flood. When the fountains of the deep broke open and the torrential rains started pouring down it took out countless animals and caused devastating damage to the earth's landscape. We can look at places like the Grand Canyon and see the kind of immense damage that much water all at once can cause. We know that water is one of if not the most destructive forces on earth and how rapidly it can change an environment, so it is strong evidence at the very least. The gap theory is a dangerous belief because instead of taking God at his word in Genesis, we are attempting to compromise the Bible in order to make the secular science work as an origin of how we got here and that is a very dangerous game to play and again this theory is entirely unsupported according to scripture. Quite simply, the gap theory is compromising the Bible and heretical to scripture and even if something major like this happened then surely we would have a record of this in Genesis but we do not.

How old is the Universe?

By Caleb Mace • March 10, 2025
How old is the universe? Well that all depends on who you ask. The general consensus that the scientific community agrees upon is that the universe has been around for 13.8 billion years which would have been when the supposed Big Bang first happened. Over the years, this estimate has changed dramatically. Before 1999, scientists claimed the universe was anywhere from seven to twenty billion years old and a recent theory from Professor Rajendra Gupta from the University of Ottawa claims that the universe may be 26.7 billion years old. He proposed this theory based on evidence from the James Webb telescope where we can see “advanced galaxies” and cosmic background radiation. Now, I’ve previously touched on this Cosmic Background Radiation and noted several key points of evidence and doubts against this claim but why does the scientific community constantly need to change the age of the universe whenever they find something that doesn’t fit in with their supposed theories? I believe these extraordinary claims need even more extraordinary evidence for proof. In 2023, scientists were finding galaxies with the James Webb Telescope that they were claiming came into existence anywhere from two hundred to five hundred million years after the Big Bang occurred. But wait, this is confusing because if the Big Bang was the start of everything as they say then how could galaxies form completely independently? The scientific community can never get their story straight and we are constantly finding proof that weighs against the billions of years theory and proves a young earth. As Creationists and Christians, we believe that the universe is only around 6,000 years old and we first came to that number by tracing the genealogies in the Bible all the way from Adam to the time of Jesus. With recent scientific discoveries, we can show that the universe is in fact only around 6,000 years and not billions with there being ample observable evidence in our galaxy alone to prove this. Firstly, we know that the gravitational pull of the Earth's moon Luna significantly impacts the Earth’s rotation and its stability with rotating on the planets axis. In the 1970’s, we learned from laser beams that were reflected from the surface of the moon that it is actually pulling away from the Earth at a rate of about 3.78 centimeters every year. This is interesting because the moon is approximately 384,400 kilometers away so if the universe were 13.8 billion years old, we can show from mathematics that 10.1 billion years ago the moon would have literally been inside of the earth so how would something like this be possible if the big bang were true? Secondly, the Earths rotations has been gradually slowing by 1.8 milliseconds per century and is primarily affected by the gravitational pull of our moon. So, if the Earth is so old then shouldn’t it have completely stopped rotating a few billion years ago? Thirdly, let's look at Saturn. Scientists discovered in 2017 that Saturn’s rings are slowing disappearing and NASA estimates that about the rings are losing about 6,300 pounds of ice every second! They estimate that the planets rings will be gone in about one hundred million to three hundred million years but how can this possibly fit in with the 13.8 billion years old theory? Fourthly, comets with their rate of deterioration of ice and dust only have a lifespan of about 10,000 years according to the scientific community and we actually see them die out frequently. A man by the name of Jan Oort proposed in the 1950’s that new comets must originate in the Oort cloud that is on the edge of our solar system but when you dive into it there is unsurprisingly no observable evidence of comets forming. Lastly and very interestingly, when we take a look at stars, we know that there are small long-lived stars and large short-lived ones because the more mass a star has the quicker it burns out. What is mind-boggling is that just in the Milky Way galaxy alone there are over 100 billion observable stars! However, we see stars blowing up all the time and astronomers estimate that large stars have a max lifespan of less than 10 million years while small stars can last all the way up to 10 billion years. So, if our universe is 13.8 billion years old then how do we still have stars in the sky? Well, it’s theorized that new stars are produced in the Milky Way galaxy every year to replace the ones that have burnt out but of course, there has been no proof of this actually happening and we’re left with a bunch of “theories and guesses” as to why things happen with scientists constantly having to change their answers. We’re told never to question the science but doesn't the very definition of the word science mean “the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation, experimentation, and the testing of theories against the evidence obtained”? Hundreds of years ago it was believed that the Earth was actually at the center of the universe and everything revolved around it. What’s interesting is that a lot of evidence that the scientific community finds ends up proving that the universe isn’t nearly as old as they think it is. The intricate design of our universe is undeniable proof that we must have come from an intelligent creator and the more we study the universe the more in awe us Christians are that God spoke this universe into existence! What’s remarkable is that if the Earth were even one inch closer to the sun it would cause a mass extinction event due to the increased heat we would receive so the notion that the entire universe was just a colossal accident and we just happened to come about due to random chance and processes is absurdity at its finest, entirely illogical, and has no real proof to back it up.  Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth.”

Refuting the Big Bang

By Caleb Mace • March 10, 2025
Where did we come from? As Christians, we know that God created the universe and everything in it in six literal days. We read in Genesis 1:1 that “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” However, the scientific community unanimously agrees on the theory that we came from the “Big Bang.” So, what is the Big Bang and what are some of the inherent problems with this theory? Science teaches that “The universe began, scientists believe, with every speck of its energy jammed into a very tiny point. This extremely dense point exploded with unimaginable force, creating matter and propelling it outward to make the billions of galaxies of our vast universe.” ( Exploratorium.com , 2024) The problem is that this theory is riddled with as many holes as swiss cheese and raises more questions than it answers. The first law of thermodynamics tells us that energy cannot be created or destroyed. It’s in a constant state of being. They claim that all the energy in the universe came from a singularity just before the explosion which resulted in the force necessary for the Big Bang. If this is true, then where could this energy have originated from and how did all of the elements get created from this explosion? The scientific community has been searching for an answer to this question for years but they have never been able to come up with any evidence that supports their theory. Now most astronomers agree that the Big Bang must have been rotating on a sort of axis when the explosion occurred. If this was the case then we should see the law of conservation of angular momentum in place and everything should be spinning in the same direction in orbit. Except, that’s not what we see. We have an entire galaxy named “NGC 4622” which spins clockwise in contrast to the other observable galaxies which spin counterclockwise. In addition to this, we have several large moons that spin in a different direction compared to their respective planets with the most notable one being Neptune’s moon Triton. Another argument that scientists haven’t been able to come up with an answer for is if the Big Bang theory were true then why is the universe so clumpy? If everything spun out in an instant then all of the matter should be evenly distributed except that’s not what we see. We have entire galaxies with differing amounts of space between them some being 5 or 100 million light years apart! One key point of “proof” that scientists will use to defend the theory of the Big Bang is the leftover cosmic background radiation that has been detected in space. Astronomers see this and claim this as proof even though there’s no way to show that this heat even came from the Big Bang at all. Some theorize that the radiation could have come from emission from dust particles or plasma in galaxies and even further evidence attempts to disprove the notion by citing findings such as a non-perfect blackbody spectrum in the radiation, anisotropy issues, and plasma effects. I believe a man by the name of Fred Hoyle said it best when he wrote in his book The Intelligent Universe that “I have little hesitation in saying that as a result a sickly pall now hangs over the big bang theory. As I have mentioned earlier, when a pattern of facts becomes set against a theory, experience shows that it rarely recovers.” (Doyle, 1983) What’s interesting to note about Fred, is that he was an incredibly renowned astronomer and cosmologist who was actually the one who coined the term “The Big Bang” Not only him, but several other notable Astronomers such as Hannes Alfven, Geoffrey Burbidge, and Halton Arp all casted doubt on the validity of the Big Bang theory.  If the Big Bang theory were true, we would see more pieces of evidence for the claim instead we get a theory that scientists have to consistently rewrite time and time again in order to fit their narrative and disprove the Bible but when the theory gets broken down, we can see how it just doesn’t work. Now I do believe that Christians will have our own version of a sort of Big Bang but ours happens at the end of time. 2 Peter 3:10 says “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.” Looking at the universe, it's obvious that we must have had a creator and we didn't get here by random chance or by an accident. The scientific community disagrees with this idea but to the Christian, it's abundantly clear.