Monday, June 8, 2015

#85 Spontaneous Generation

It’s funny that I remember learning about Spontaneous Generation way back in grade school or middle school because I don’t remember much else from those days. But I remember the teacher saying that people used to believe that if you put an old shirt outside with some seeds in it that in a few weeks you would spontaneously create mice out of the shirt and seeds. How foolish they were. I was laughing inside that we are so much smarter these days.


As a matter of fact, Spontaneous Generation is known to have been believed as far back as the 4th century BC and up until the middle 1800’s. It was famously explained by Aristotle.

“So with animals, some spring from parent animals according to their kind, whilst others grow spontaneously and not from kindred stock; and of these instances of spontaneous generation some come from putrefying earth or vegetable matter, as is the case with a number of insects, while others are spontaneously generated in the inside of animals out of the secretions of their several organs.”
—Aristotle, History of Animals, Book V, Part 1 [1]

Spontaneous Generation is the belief that life can be created in a very short period of time, almost spontaneously, if given the right conditions. Here are some examples.


“For example, a seventeenth century recipe for the spontaneous production of mice required placing sweaty underwear and husks of wheat in an open-mouthed jar, then waiting for about 21 days, during which time it was alleged that the sweat from the underwear would penetrate the husks of wheat, changing them into mice. Although such a concept may seem laughable today, it is consistent with the other widely held cultural and religious beliefs of the time.” [2]

“Many believed in spontaneous generation because it explained such occurrences as the appearance of maggots on decaying meat.” [3]


“Crucial to this doctrine is the idea that life comes from non-life, with the conditions, and that no causal agent is needed (i.e. Parent). Such hypothetical processes sometimes are referred to as abiogenesis, in which life routinely emerges from non-living matter on a time scale of anything from minutes to weeks, or perhaps a season or so.” [4]

It was not until 1859 because of an ingenious experiment by Louis Pasteur that science began to realize that life does not occur by Spontaneous Generation. In 1864 Pasteur came up with his declaration that “all life is from life”. It has become known as the Law of Biogenesis.


“The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the observation that living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation. This is summarized in the phrase "all life [is] from life." A related statement is "all cells [are] from cells;" this observation is one of the central statements of cell theory.” [5]

“For more than one hundred years, biologists have taught that spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter was disproven by the work of Redi, Spallanzani, and ultimately Pasteur. This work was so conclusive; that biology codified the "Law of Biogenesis," which states that life only comes from previously existing life. Although, this doesn't prove absolutely that life couldn't ever have generated itself from non-living matter because it is impossible to prove a universal negative. However, the Law of Biogenesis is just as solid as the Law of Gravity. (emphasis added. Ed.) Even though we accept the law of gravity, we cannot prove that if you continued to drop apples forever, that at one point, one apple may not fall.” [6]

“Spontaneous generation is the incorrect hypothesis that nonliving things are capable of producing life.” [7]

Well, well, we seem to have a dilemma. Evolutionists want us to believe, as they do, that a long time ago, life suddenly and spontaneously sprang from chemicals. That would seem to contradict the Law of Biogenesis and all established science since the 1850’s.

Atheists and Evolutionists are clever folks of course and they know they have a problem, namely there is no such thing as Spontaneous Generation, even on the bacterial level. So what do they conclude when all scientific evidence is against them? They conclude there really was Spontaneous Generation a long time ago and Pasteur didn’t really disprove it. Besides that, Darwin wasn’t really talking about the origin of life. Others have taken care of that argument, or not, sort of.

“So we must ask - what did Pasteur prove? Did he prove that no life can ever come from non-living things? No, he didn't, and this is because you cannot disprove something like that experimentally, only theoretically, and he had no theory of molecular biology to establish this claim. What he showed was that it was highly unlikely that modern living organisms arose from non-living organic material. This is a much more restricted claim than that primitive life once arose from non-living non-organic material.” [8]

“1. Pasteur did not disprove the origin of life by natural means, and the saying "all cells from cells" was not intended to cover the initial period of life on earth. Darwin did not propose a theory of the origin of life in the beginning.
2. Evolutionary theory was not proposed to account for the origins of living beings, only the process of change once life exists. However, many have thought that the theory of evolution logically requires a beginning of life, which is true. Of those, many have thought that a natural account of the origin of life is necessary, and some have proposed models which have borne up or not as research proceeds.” [9]

So what did Darwin really "prove", huh, using this reasoning? Did rocks come alive? The Theory of Evolution does require a beginning of life and it does not provide an explanation. In fact no scientific experiment has ever shown that one species can evolve into a different one

Scientists say there is no Spontaneous Generation. “All life is from life.” I say so too. God is alive and God generated life. It didn’t happen accidentally from chemicals or non-living matter.

There must be God.

----------------------------------------------------
[1] Wikipedia, "Spontaneous generation", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

[2] Russell Levine and Chris Evers, "The Slow Death of Spontaneous Generation", http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/Spontaneous_Generation.php

[3] Spontaneous Generation, Encyclopaedia Britannica, http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/560859/spontaneous-generation 

[4] Wikipedia, "Spontaneous generation", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_generation

[5] Wikipedia, “Biogenesis”, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biogenesis


[7] Origin of Life, Spontaneous Generation, http://www.infoplease.com/cig/biology/spontaneous-generation.html

[8] John S. Wilkins, "Spontaneous Generation and the Origin of Life", http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/spontaneous-generation.html


[9] John S. Wilkins, "Spontaneous Generation and the Origin of Life", http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/spontaneous-generation.html

2 comments:

  1. I enjoy reading your proofs of God and have learned so much. I was wondering if you had considered adding firelies to your list

    ReplyDelete
  2. Atheists don't necessarily believe life came from nothing. We don't know the exact origin of life. Lightning hitting a stagnant pool is only one hypothesis and we don't always claim to be right.

    ReplyDelete