In his letter of Oct. 4, Colin Hough expresses skepticism that life on Earth (and possibly Mars) originated in “dirty, salty water.” This is a wild oversimplification of what biochemical theorists and researchers have established as the primordial conditions likely present so many billions of years ago.
By the way, Charles Darwin never claimed to know how life came to be – the science regarding this was, at the time, sadly lacking. The closest he approached the subject was an obviously poetic reference to a “warm, little pond.”
Mr. Hough claims that current theory is “neither plausible nor comprehensive.” If he would bother to perform a Google search (ignoring the absurdities presented on creationist websites), he just might change his mind, though I decline to hold my breath.
No, science does not have a rock-solid explanation for how life came about – that’s the reason scientists never stop asking “how and why.” But to assert that “life can never come from non-life, any more than matter and energy can come from nothing” is the height of arrogance – the, yes, plausibility of the RNA World theory and overwhelming evidence of the Big Bang render this statement nonsensical.
Dean Christensen, Fresno