How would you feel if evolutionists told you that you came from mud? It’s probably not any worse than other notions they’ve been telling mankind for years: we all came from slime, primordial soup, volcanoes, or were seeded here by space aliens. How these notions find their way into science is an interesting question.
The source article on PNAS,1 for instance, presents only the flimsiest connection to science. An international team studied some “Early Archean serpentine mud volcanoes at Isua, Greenland” as a possible “a niche for early life.” They did not find life evolving there. They only found that the zinc in the serpentinite was depleted in heavy isotopes, which might indicate they were once alkalinic hydrothermal beds. If, therefore, one accepts the notion that life originated at moderate temperature in an alkaline environment, and if these rocks date to the time evolutionists assume life first appeared, then “The reduced character and the high pH inferred for these fluids make Archean serpentine mud volcanoes a particularly favorable setting for the early stabilization of amino acids.” [News flash: amino acids are not alive.]
That was enough for the secular science news sites to go ecstatic, leaping into the hot mud for visions of our origins. PhysOrg headlined, “Research group finds ancient deep sea mud volcano as possible site for origin of life,” using the L-word life eight times in 400 words. Charles Choi beat that ratio with 10 uses in a similar length article on Live Science, titled, “Ancient Mud Volcanoes Perfect for Early Life, Rock Study Suggests.” Any emergent life is likely to prefer beer (alkaline) than hot coke (acid). One of the co-authors of the paper said of regular hydrothermal vents, “It’d be like trying to make life evolve from hot Coca-Cola.” They ought to talk to the Canadians who think life formed in acid (see Science Daily). It would seem that experiments could be done putting amino acids in warm beer and hot coke to see what crawls out.
1. Pons et al., “Early Archean serpentine mud volcanoes at Isua, Greenland, as a niche for early life,” PNAS October 17, 2011, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1108061108.
We are witnessing none else than a modern mystery religion, sanctified by priests known as “scientists” whose authority must never be questioned. From their pagan temples, they make pronouncements that the servants deliver to the deluded masses.
Wake up, LiveScience and PhysOrg! Who are you, reporters or lackeys? Can’t you think for yourselves? Do you have to regurgitate every silly thing the priests from academia say, just because they call themselves “scientists”? We’re not even demanding you abandon your faith in Dear Father Charlie. Just have some guts and stand up to baloney, OK? If political reporters can do some investigation and ask hard questions, so can you. It will be good for science.