The Origin of Life on Earth

El Tatio Chile via credit twiga_269

Where did we come from?
How did life start?
What is the origin of man?

These are questions that have been pondered by man since the beginning. One answer, the workings of evolution, was proposed by Charles Darwin in his On The Origins Of Species. There are an unknown number of different life forms currently sharing this planet. And there have been an even larger number of unknown species that have roamed the lands and seas in the epochs of the past. To date there have been 1.5 million species cataloged and a best guess estimate of up to another 8 million that have not been cataloged. These numbers only look at current species and not at previous inhabitants of the planet. And everyday, scientists predict that species that have not even been ‘discovered’ are going extinct at the hands of man.

Evolution project by NTamura

While the actions of man are a whole ugly 50 gallon barrel of worms, we will leave it for another day. Today we are exploring the pondering of where we (all life) came from. And to that means the generally accepted and propagated fact is that all life emerged from the primordial ooze. Once emerged the fact of natural selection took over and brought us to today. Now, before you die hard evolutionists want to start screaming that evolution has been proven over and over again and thus is FACT. I counter you; not, that some aspects of evolution are not true, but, that evolution as presented by Mr. Darwin is only part of the story, and honestly, he did not get it all right, but, he was on to a few pieces of the puzzle.

Now, not to offend or leave out the other side, the creationists. If one studies the myths of creation, a large number of them speak of either God, a god, or a specific god, such as Zeus, creating man from dirt, mud or clay from the earth. That all creatures were created in their current ‘state’ and that man is the chosen species. When discovering other myths from various cultures we also hear of different kinds of man or man-like species that have come and gone. There are also myths that tell of even different times of our own mankind with regard to our life-spans, our sizes, and other physical features. While both camps seem mostly unwilling to even look at the other point of view, I would argue that they both are equally wrong and equally right!

After everyone gets over being mad at me, do yourself and mankind a favor and continue reading.

So let’s now look at the real facts. Both sides have ‘life’ coming out of mud or a puddle or pile of dirt. Sounds like the same thing to me. Both sides have ‘different man-kind’ living at different times in our history. Both sides have man ‘changing’ in some way or ways over time. As we can see if you strip away the division we can find that the basics, the foundations of both sides are basically the same.


Yet, we can also look at each side and find some pieces that each builds on that are not solid in their own right. The creationists are unwilling to accept that some of their myths have time-lines that are not accurate. Another fact that is somewhat challenging to prove, in most myths are the outside influences of deities, demons, and others.  While it is true that the devil is in the details; sometimes, the trick is to understand just what the details are defining. Also, there should be understanding of the story-teller and the listener to the story. Think of how you might answer the same question posed by a child and by an adult. Something that we have lost in our modern era is that actual art of story-telling and thus it creates confusion and lack of understanding. It is like reading a epic in a language that you have elementary knowledge of.

Then there are the Darwinists, who claim that we all progressed from the same single-celled one in a google chance amoeba. Which would actually mean that there were by the science numbers up to 10 million of those similarly luckiest single-cells, which would actually make them utterly common and thus should have been replicated by now, by those same scientists. The most basic concept of natural selection that is those species that do not adapt die off and that each species always adopts the genes that make them the strongest. That supposition suggests that we should actually have fewer species now than we do and it also suggests that we should basically only have ONE of each different species. Now before you get your safety goggles all steamed up; yes, I know that I am over simplifying the process…but, bear with me the simplicity helps limit the discussion to a starting point.
But the biggest issue with evolution is that we do not seem to be able to find the missing links that prove the jumping of species.

tool use by birds

What I mean is that we do not have any of the missing links that supposedly had to exist to make life on earth a single tree of life instead of a forest of life. Evolutionists can in some species follow, for example all dogs and wolves and other canines back to a possible ancestor, they have yet to get the canine and feline back to the same ancestor. All of the ‘original’ ancestors are theorized not discovered and cataloged. Most importantly, the scientific definition of what makes us ‘man’ or different from animals has to keep changing. Man is defined by culture, but what is culture? It was the use of tools, but there are other animals that use tools; it was the use of language, but numerous animals use vocalizations to communicate which is the accepted definition of language.

Yes, there some features that all or groups of species have in common, but that in and of itself does not support evolution in its totality. Just as the differences do not in and of themselves disprove evolution for creationism. This is a story that cannot be told until both sides admit they do not know the whole of the story and that both sides have pieces of the puzzle if they will work together we will be able to put the whole thing together sooner.

DNA: The Most Accurate Ignorance In History

In recent history, the last few decades, all the rage to prove the written history has been centered on the new love affair with the absoluteness of DNA. I know what ALL you PRO DNAers are thinking, it is DNA. And DNA doesn’t lie. It is accurate,it is pure, and it is ALL fact. For what it does, yes, I allow that DNA does not in and of itself lie. That being said DNA can only tell a few details in an enormous story! The proof of the detail is only as good as the supporting facts, which as we know, can be incomplete, biased or limited in scope and or depth.

vitstudiostock via

A good example is that of most ethnic DNA studies, to show that all of this group or that group have this gene or that marker in common are incredibly handicapped. The problem is several fold; first, the studies are conducted with a very, very, small number of believed members of the whole group, when I say that I mean like in some cases less than 1% of the population of the group as a whole. Tell me of any experiment that would hold up to any rigorous peer review with less than 1% of a population whole being tested and not even that group has 100% results of the find. Let me put this is in a better example for you to understand how these absolute facts are being taken out of their limited context to prop up huge theories….Aliens come to Earth and their ‘Scotty’ beams up 70 out of 7 billion Earthlings 28 of whom have both blonde hair and blue eyes, so they state in their Wikipedia, that Earthlings are humanoids with blonde hair and blue eyes and thus it is blonde hair and blue eyes that determines a humanoid is an Earthling.

DNA Molecule of Life

However, in addition to usually using no more than 1000 examples of a group, which for most ethnic groups is nothing, they are not consistent with being able to have properly chosen the right examples of a group. What do I mean? If you have ever attempted to trace your family tree you know what I am talking about; if you haven’t, trust me you will learn just how much of what we think we know, we either cannot prove or we prove is totally wrong. There were many reasons for persons to get married and as we still know, being married does not insure fidelity, and there were even more reasons for false information to be given for many noble and not so noble reasons. You have no idea what I am talking about; I am talking about affairs, rape, molestation, war, invasions, religious persecutions, ethnic cleansing, assimilation. Trust me there is way more contaminated DNA in ethnic groups then we want to admit to. For me to accept any DNA study as an absolute you would have to base it on a closed society and we don’t do that, cause we do not have any truly closed societies. We do have societies that have stayed semi-isolated, but we cannot even be completely sure of just how pure their DNA is either. Thus, every DNA test that is trying to find differences between ethnic groups is flawed based on the fact that we can safely assume that all donations are contaminated. While I believe that we should try to never assume, as making assumptions and playing them off as facts is how we have gotten so much of history wrong, based on the examples that I have given you it is highly probable that most samples will be contaminated.


Now before you get upset that I am screaming foul, I am not. I am not saying that the DNA tests are as poorly done as the study of the Giza Necropolis. What I am saying is that like with the Pyramids, just cause you have a rectangle box that some people think is large enough for a body to fit in that does not make it a tomb, thus less than 1% of a population having a similar trait or gene or marker does not make that a standard for that ‘race’/ethnic group. Also, just like people either went to or lived along the banks of the Nile and built the wonders of Giza, but we do not know that they had always been in Giza/Egypt and the people that live along the Nile today are not the same people that lived there no matter when you think the Pyramids were built. And that goes for pretty much EVERYWHERE in the world today. That also does not mean that there was not any mixing of those peoples and these peoples.

Here is the bottom line, DNA is a fact from one point of view. If 2 people stand facing each other they will see totally different views, this does not make either one wrong, mater of fact they are both right. But to know the whole story, you have to be willing to take both truths and use them as they are, not more and not less, to help tell the whole story and to understand that you only have 2 points of view and that is only part of the whole. But we have to learn that each and every part of the story is important to the whole and we cannot leave out parts that we do not like or that are not pretty then we are losing parts of the story that is our own.

Some links to related articles:

EDIT: Below are articles where DNA got it WRONG and innocent men were jailed for it…..


Out of Africa, Still?

Well you have to give the ‘mainstreams‘ credit, they don’t give up even after they lose the fight. Of course there are many examples of the defeated never admitting their defeat and I can imagine if your ego is as huge as some mainstreamers then admitting that you might have had it wrong cause you instantly went from we think or based on what we know to THIS IS FACT! like a Ferrari going from 0 to 60, hitting that brick wall at the end might smart a little.

Crow Canyon via

But I don’t blame the egomaniacs, no I blame the institutions! That is right, academic pursuit is controlled by the institutes of higher learning around the world and they ALL have an agenda and a position and are interested in donations (read profits), not the pursuit of knowledge. Maybe I am just the extreme optimist, but I believe that most academics, no matter what their field, chose to be academics cause they purely and sincerely wanted to pursue knowledge and truth. But the world likes to have complete control over us, it is very few that have the courage to let the world shun them or have parents so unconditionally supportive that they encourage being happy and being honest to one’s self over having the nice house and car and a ‘good job’. And what child, at least up to early adulthood, doesn’t want to make mom and dad proud!

That being said, once you get your degree you need funding so that you can research and seek that knowledge, the most common sources of funding are those institutions of higher learning (and you are probably already in with the one that you got your last degree with) and foundations and museums. Whereas you might have been left to your own ‘choices’ as a student working on your Masters or PhD., as their employee they are much more interested in your pursuits, as you now professionally carry their name; and they have an agenda, whether they work within the confines of a religious dogma, or have maintained a ‘long line of academic discoveries’ or they promote a conservative education, it is there. Stated or unspoken you know it, I know it, we all know it! And your pursuit of knowledge has now had it wings clipped and the scissors were TENURE.

What an awful, vulgar word! That word needs to be removed from ALL education! If you are a good teacher then you should be able to teach without fear and no teacher at any level (no employee anywhere in any field, except politicians) should fear being fired over POLITICS! Thus if one wants to pursue any part of the pursuit of knowledge under the safety and security of a university or other such institution then one must as they say ‘play by the rules’.
And we have many examples of ‘playing by the rules’:

  1. The Pyramids of Giza were built for the sole purpose of tombs for three 4th dynasty pharaohs, yet there is absolutely NO real evidence to support this, the prior and later pharaohs all used underground hidden chambers and the building skills 500yrs on either side of the alleged date of the pyramids is technologically inferior (understatement).
  2. The National Geographic version of the Florida World History text books states as a fact that the Nazca lines ARE irrigation canals! (If you need this one explained message me.)
  3. That humans only came to North and South America via the Bering Land Bridge from the last ice age. Yet, there are many sites on both continents that are older than the Bering Land Bridge.
  4. That civilization is ONLY ~5000 years old! You cannot accurately measure stone buildings/monuments. You have to rely on ‘carbon finds’ at the site. Most experts will dig till they hit the first one dig a little more to ‘prove’ no more and then date the site as being built then, instead of used/occupied/existing in part or in whole.

There are many more examples which you can seek for yourself in addition to the 4 listed above; however, the big one that DOES impact all other ‘mis-truths’ in our history is that it is stated and taught as FACT without any room for doubt or deviation that man evolved only in Africa and then ventured our from Africa to populate the rest of the world and this was done on a very precise and recent timeline. These same experts are kinda funny about how many different species existed at any one time and interbreeding is an even more touchy subject. However, DNA studies show that present day humans, that is you and me, carry DNA of which at least 2% is directly from Neanderthal; considering that Neanderthal ‘died out’ about 40,000 years ago and you only get 1/2 of each parents DNA to make up your own, I think by the math it is hard to think that Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon only in very very small numbers interacted and interbred. Not to mention DNA studies show that the Aborigines from Austrailia do not share the same ‘Eve’ that the rest of the world share. And there are groups in South East Asia and Oceania that contain DNA from at one unknown independent ancestor.

Hominids viaDiscovery

Again just by the numbers supposedly ‘we’ only left Africa, on foot mind you cause we weren’t technologically advanced, ‘no more than’ 60,000 years ago and our ancestors left not more than 200,000 years ago (but experts claim they all died out but us). Yet, there are footprints in Britain dated to a million years agoartifacts have been found in Arabia that date 100,000 years ago and would be from ‘us’, then in Asia there has been a tooth of Homo sapiens that was found dated to more than 70 thousand years ago possibly as old as 125 thousand years ago. Also in Asia there has been found another human species that lived along side Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon. However, originally believed to only cross paths in Asia, this new species, Denisovans, there is now a femur bone dated to 400,000 years ago found in Spain that is more closely linked to Denisovans than to either Neanderthal or Homo heidelbergensis the assumed total contributors to the population at the time. There are individuals in Oceanic and some Indian populations that seem to have as much as 5% DNA in common with Denisovans.

I think it is and always has been fair to say that how we ended up the way we are and all over the world is still a huge wonderful mystery and that we should seek with open minds to discover the truth of the journey and learn so much more than we ever thought possible.