Page 17 - The Errors the American National Academy of Sciences

T tion the theory of evolution, which
T
here is no doubt that the first ques-

claims to explain the origin of life, has to
answer is how life in an inanimate universe began and how
inanimate materials came to produce living ones. Yet for some
reason, the National Academy of Sciences' booklet Science and

Creationism, prepared with the aim of putting forward "the most im-
portant proofs of the theory of evolution," contains no answer to that
question. Instead, it contains the NAS authors' assumptions, which
portray the theory of evolution as if it were something unquestioned
and definitively proved, with no room for doubt, and which paint a
"rosy picture" for evolutionists. This is what the authors have to say, as
though the question of how it is that inanimate matter gave rise to liv-

ing things as a result of chance chemical processes were not one of the
greatest dilemmas facing the theory of evolution:
For those who are studying the origin of life, the question is no
longer whether life could have originated by chemical processes in-
volving nonbiological components. The question instead has be-
come which of many pathways might have been followed to
produce the first cells. (Science and Creationism, p. 6)
This is how the authors refer to the probability of the
"chemical process" in question:

Experiments conducted under conditions intended to
resemble those present on the primitive Earth
have resulted in the production of some of
the chemical components of pro-
teins, DNA, and RNA. Some