Scientist and science publications have been pushing the idea if there is water, life is certain to have emerged from it. This reminds me of this idea, for many years it was believed that maggots were created with spoiled food until it was also disproved many years later by Louis Pasteur.
Take a look at some of these articles that are based on what I call,“ingredients approach”, science daily reports…
“This discovery suggests that this region of our solar system contains more water ice than anticipated,” said University of Central Florida Professor Humberto Campins. “And it supports the theory that asteroids may have hit Earth and brought our planet its water and the building blocks for life to form and evolve here.”
In space.com has another study with the ingredients approach, “We can do this entirely in an atmosphere,” researcher Sarah Horst, a University of Arizona graduate student, said in a statement. “We don’t need liquid water, we don’t need a surface. We show that it is possible to make very complex molecules in the outer parts of an atmosphere.”
Sarah didn’t show any evidence for her claims that complex molecules come from the atmosphere, what she did was focus in on the ingredients and made the assumption those ingredients would emerge into life. She also claims that Titan’s atmosphere is a reservoir of prebiotic molecules that could serve as the springboard to life.
New Scientist has a version of the ingredient approach, “To find evidence for life we would need to measure the light spectrum of the planet’s atmosphere and look for the signature of water vapour, as well as possible by-products of life, such as oxygen and methane.”
And lastly, science daily and I believe someone linked this page in the comments, “By reconstructing an ancient protein and tracing how it subtly changed over vast periods of time to produce scores of modern-day descendants, scientists have shown how evolution tinkers with early forms and leaves the impression that complexity evolved many times.”
Creationists know the basic principle of evolution, a step by step, extremely slow process, so with that in mind, how a complex enzyme “emerged” so far back? The worst part of all these article is that they don’t have experimental evidence for their claims. For example, life has never been produced in a lab for any ingredients. So all their talk about all these ingredients supposedly able to emerge is unfounded. The Miller–Urey experiment didn’t produce life, in fact it has a “trap” in it. Why? Because if the things that were created in the lab would go through the process again, they would be destroyed. In nature, there are no such traps!
So why do some scientists just throw out these claims without not even having one “natural” example to go by? If they really know how life supposedly emerged through the ingredients don’t you think they could have reproduced it in a lab? They are really at the spoiled food assumption which life would supposedly emerge from that. No progress in other words! The foundation of the ingredient story holds no merit, no theory, but just a host of far out ideas about a fictional framework.