Alan McDougall
[QUOTEThe theory of evolution is based upon random mutations and survival of the fittest – i.e. a genetic mutation occurs, and if it is beneficial the organism prospers, but if it is detrimental the organism struggles, and the mutation dies out along with the organism][/QUOTE]
And this has nothing to do with how chemistry became life in the first place, which is what you asked. Evolution is a fact, it is obvious in the history of life. The theory of evolution is our attempt to explain that fact.
But you asked "What are the Odds of life coming into existence by chance alone?". Though your question reveals a certain lack of knowledge of chemistry. Chemical reactions do not occur by chance, they follow the laws of physics. Hydrogen and oxygen(to greatly simplify)ALWAYS form water once the chemical reaction is started. We find amino acids(precursor to proteins)in gas clouds throughout the Universe. In fact we find many precursor chemicals in meteorites falling on Earth today. Given the right conditions these chemicals will combine to form more complex molecules. Complex molecules of a certain form ARE life, once a molecule exists which can make copies of itself evolution will choose those most fit to that environment simply by eliminating all those that do not fit as well and evolution is off to the races. In the case of Earth that first self-replicator had to appear between 4.5 billion years ago(bya)(when the Earth was a molten mess)and 3.7 bya(when the first fossil life we have evidence of existed), But before that life existed there was a period of chemical evolution among the complex chemicals delivered to Earth by the very material that makes up the Earth. And not one reaction in the uncountable googleplex of single reactions happened by chance. Statistically, the probability of life forming under the right conditions is near certainty. Where life can exist, it will exist.
It is the probability that the right conditions exist that is very low, there is only a narrow band around our sun where liquid water can exist, where radiation is low enough, where bombardment is rare, etc. Lucky for us that our Earth orbits in that zone or we would not be here to wonder about it. But there are billions of other solar systems in our galaxy, and hundreds of billions of galaxies, so it is almost certain that there is nothing unique about Earth.
It sounds like a reasonable theory for explaining how small changes occur, e.g. to gradually adapt to changing environmental conditions. But it completely fails to address how complex bodily systems and structures form or how life began in the first place.
Again, has nothing to do with your original question and only shows you incredulity. Every trait modern life has was developed by the same process repeated over and over throughout the 3.7 billion years we KNOW life has existed. That includes big ones and small ones. Rabbit fossils are not found in the Precambrian(~800mya)because the major features of a rabbit had not evolved yet. In 3 billion years life consisted only of simpler forms like single cells and clumps of cells. And since the Cambrian we have ample evidence of the evolution of every trait that collectively we call a rabbit, EVERY trait.
Again, Abiogenesis is the study of chemistry developing into life, Evolution has nothing to say about how life started. As I said in another thread, it is similar to the two, separate processes of building a car and driving a car. Whether the car is assembled by a trained cadre of mechanics or by robots makes no difference to the fact the car exists and those driving the car can do so whether they know how the car was made or not. Abiogenesis is analogous to knowledge of how to build the car, driving the car is analogous to studying the evolution of life once it exists. While you are smoother than a certain other poster(WSRN), you are just as badly misinformed, it seems.
Grumpy
