Not having kept a daily journal—which I’ve often regretted not doing so, I have to rely on memory. While my memory is still in good shape, recalling the date on which some particular event occurred, or even the year, gives way at times to guess work.
Back, say 1957 or 58, and with nothing to go on other than a question ricochetting about in my mind, ‘If it’s true, why didn’t Paul preach it’, and an idea I had concerning how all llife forms first came into existence, I eagerly read an article I discovered in a scientific magazine from the shelves of a local library an article that so closely resembled my thoughts, I bought a copy of the magazine, which I promptly mislaid and never found.
My idea was this: Every species of animal life originated from but one source, a “sea of universal “soup” containing what I chose to call molecules—I was and I still am woefully ignorant of all things scientic. What was to become a horse became a horse. What was to become a zebra, became a zebra and so on.
Following that line of reasoning, it made sense to me to conclude that homo sapiens also evolved from a more primitive form, but nevertheless, were destined to become what we are today … a species with thumbs which give us the ability to preform intricate tasks and the only species with the ability to think, to imagine the impossible and to believe in the improbable—but, back to the original subject matter.
This morning I decided to search for either the article I read back in the later 1950s or its counterpart. All I could recall were the words, ‘primordial soup’. The author of the article suggested that, if there was viable life somewhere in the universe other than on earth, life would likely resemble lifeforms on earth because of life originating from what was commonly called “primordial soup”. Well, I found such a site and I’ve taken the liberty of lifting a few words from the work I believe I read those many years ago:
August 7th, 2009 (PhysOrg.com) — In 1953, Stanley Miller filled two flasks with chemicals assumed to be present on the primitive Earth, connected the flasks with rubber tubes and introduced some electrical sparks as a stand-in for lightning. The now famous experiment showed what amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, could easily be generated from this primordial stew. But despite that seminal experiment, neither he nor others were able to take the next step: that of showing how life’s code could come from such humble beginnings.
Mr. Miller did not claim to have discovered some long-hidden truth, but did go on to suggest that all life had its beginning from a single source, and he wasn’t referring to that source as God.
Nothing pleases as does a bit of vindication, because those very thoughts were my thoughts back in the latter 1950s, and still are. This may be true: up until the present time, scientists have not been able to create “life”. Is their failure to do so, proof they never will? Perhaps not in the years yet allotted me, nor during the lifetime of anyone reading this, but don’t bet anything you can’t afford to lose, that they never will.
Remembering:
September 11, 2009 by mary a. kaufman
What I believe, and some scientists may agree, is that the universe – or universes, megaverse, multiverse – has existed “always”. The human brain is not equipped to understand “always”, as “always” has no before and no after.
The existence of life on this planet may not be unique. It is entirely possible that the right conditions to develope life (as we know it) – the presence of water and the right distance from a heat source – may exist in any of the millions, billions and trillons of planetary systems.
If this “always”, or the coming into existence, is called God, for lack of any other term, I am prepared to go along with this; and if science has so far not been able to explain this “always” or the event that caused existence – the time may or may never come.
The existence of life on this planet may not be unique. I’m pleased that you chose those words Peter because they remind me of an afternoon sometime in the latter fifties or early sixties. I remember musing that at one time, billions of years ago, this earth was covered with a “soup-like” mixture and, from that mixture all living things came into existence. What was meant to be, such as the equine family “horse family” and so on, right down to homo sapiens. Man may have resembled, at one point, an ape, but was never, in any sense of the word, an ape.
Shortly after, I read an article in a science magazine written by a scientist who theorized the identical happenings. He went on to state, that should there be life on other planets, life there would closely resemble life on earth. Thanks for the visit
There are many questions in life that we can never answer in our present form and understanding. Science is nothing more than a method spawned from the reasoning of limited mind.
We all come from one source and only upon death can we fully understand our true nature.
The color of yellow is incomprehensible to a blind person, and so is the mystery of the One to a limited mind.
Walter, so far, for some reason not known to me, I’ve been unable to get your comment approved. Sure hope this works. Not sure if I understand what you mean by …”science is nothing more than a method spawned from the reasoning of limited mind”. I’d say that belief in things unseen such as “God”, gods—both male and female—as well as all unseen and imagined being such as angels, devils, demons, ghosts, spirits and so on, are nothing more than the by-products of limited minds. Before medical science proved that germs and viruses caused disease, any and all forms of disease including malfuntion of the brain, it was either the will of God or the work of the devil. I very much doubt should you suffer an acute and lasting pain in the lower right abdomen you would call in the village priest to exorcize the demon causing your discomfort.
o