No.

​​Key Highlights

1. In Darwin's landmark book, On the Origin of Species there are some 800 subjective clauses, with uncertainty repeatedly admitted, instead of proof. Words such as "could," "perhaps," "possibly' plague the entire book."
2. The problem with the results was in the structure of the amino acids. Amino acids come in two forms, left-handed and right-handed which is called homochirality. Functional amino acids come in only left-handed versions.
3. The Miller-Urey experiment did not produce any proteins. It did produce a few amino acids.
4. A century of sensational discoveries in the biological sciences has taught us that life arises only from life.”
5. Precious little in the way of biochemical evolution could have happened on the Earth. It is easy to show that the two thousand or so enzymes that span the whole of life could not evolve on Earth. If one counts the number of trial assemblies of amino acids that are needed to give rise to the enzymes, the probability of their discovery by random shuffling's turns out to be 10 to the 40,000th power”.​

​Before going any further let's remember Dr Frank Turek's comment, "Science doesn't say anything, scientists do". (21) Einstein said, "The man of science is a poor philosopher". (3) When reading some articles on abiogenesis, for those who endorse it, they use unscientific terms:

• might have been
• may have been
• it’s also possible that
• they could have
• we don’t know of any
• perhaps
• one possibility

​And the one in which they can bring atrocious claims, "under the conditions found on early Earth".

​"In Darwin's landmark book, On the Origin of Species there are some 800 subjective clauses, with uncertainty repeatedly admitted instead of proof. Words such as "could," "perhaps," "possibly' plague the entire book." Mario Seiglie, (16)

​Hypotheses about the origins of life.

​The Miller-Urey experiment in attempted to make life by taking chemicals/molecules (a mixture of methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), carbon dioxide (CO2)and water (H2O)) and an electric shock to replicate the conditions of Earth’s early atmosphere to test whether organic molecules could be created abiogenically, that is, formed from chemical reactions occurring between inorganic molecules thought to exist during early earths time. Where did the methane and ammonia molecules come from? No one knows. They also assumed the early atmosphere had no oxygen, but evolutionists now think this is not true.

The result of the experiment made a few amino acids, simple organic molecules: glycine, alpha-alanine (α-alanine), and beta-alanine (β-alanine) confidently; however, he was less certain about the presence of aspartic acid and α-amino-n-butyric acid. The problem with the results was in the structure of the amino acids. Amino acids come in two forms, left-handed and right-handed which is called homochirality. They were mirror images of each other. Think of a pair of gloves, one right hand and one left hand. The problem is that life is composed of only left-handed versions of protein. The experiment was nowhere close to creating life. Actually, the results were the opposite of what they expected. 80% of the carbon in the experiment ended up in tar. Also, formic acid was formed, either is not good for life.

​The amino acids required in nature for functional proteins could never have been made by anything like this experiment. When Stanley Miller repeated the experiment in 1983 (11) with a slightly more realistic mixture of gases, he only got trace amounts of glycine, the simplest of the 20 amino acids needed. (Truman, R.) (20)

​Carl Sagan said: "The Miller-Urey experiment is now recognized as the single most significant step in convincing many scientists that life is likely to be abundant in the cosmos". (15) That was nowhere close to creating life.

While college and high school textbooks still portray the Miller-Urey experiment as true, they do not point out the failures of the experiments. One of the products was an insoluble toxic carcinogenic mixture of "tar" which is a common product of such chemical reactions including burning tobacco. Other compounds created were cyanides and carbon monoxide. Thier experiments were also critiqued because the gases they used were not similar to gases during early life development.

​Miller used different kinds of light to help synthesize the compounds he was looking for, including ultraviolet light. The problem is that in protein building light and heat both break down amino acids. On the primitive earth with light, heat and gases, amino acids would not last very long. Creating life in a test tube was much more difficult that Miller had thought. Miller never did create functional proteins (but did create a few amino acids) and to this day we cannot make them in the test tube. His experiments could not even find evidence of how chemicals formed compounds. Consider also that heat, from deep sea vents and a "warm little pond" degrade proteins.

​The Oparin-Haldane hypothesis suggests that life arose gradually from inorganic molecules, with “building blocks” like amino acids forming first and then combining to make complex polymers. Gordon-Smith, C. (4)

​The details of this model are probably not quite correct. For instance, geologists now think the early atmosphere was not reducing (low oxygen) and it's unclear whether pools at the edge of the ocean are a likely site for life's first appearance. But the basic idea – a stepwise, spontaneous formation of simple, then more complex, then self-sustaining biological molecules or assemblies – is still at the core of most origins-of-life hypotheses today. (6)

​Without high energy compounds such as ATP and enzymes, amino acids do not form the many polypeptides needed for life. even dipeptides are difficult to form under natural conditions, yet the average protein is composed of around 150-400 amino acids. (1)

​A mixture of amino acids does not create life. A spontaneous leap from inorganic to organic matter is impossible. A soup of organic molecules is a lengthy way from a living cell/organism.

Paul Davies said, "just as bricks alone don't make a house, so it takes more than a random collection of amino acids to make life. Like house bricks, the building blocks of life have to be assembled in a very specific and exceedingly elaborate way before they have the desired function". (2)

​Davies also said, "now of the opinion that there remains a huge gulf in our understanding ... This gulf in understanding is not merely ignorance about certain details, it is a major conceptual lacuna." (an unfilled space)

​In fact, one synthetic organic chemist, Dr. James Tour, challenged 10 other synthetic organic chemists to make in the lab just one of the four components of macromolecules. He would give them the raw chemicals, in the right concentration, and they would try to assemble them. No one has taken on this challenge. (19)

To make an organism we need the right substances, in the right amount, and in the right arrangement. While there would be the right substances, they would not be arranged in such a way that information is produced. When we think about information, we think about a mind. Information always comes from a mind. DNA is information. Writings on ancient statues is information. The words, in this paragraph is information.

The idea of mixing chemicals in a lab is not effective because they do not form the molecules the scientist wants. For example, when we take a multi vitamin/mineral, the body knows what to do with micronutrients. But put those same components in a test tube and they don’t know what to do.

While a living cell has DNA, RNA, proteins, etc., without a cell membrane and cytoplasm there is no way to keep these molecules together. And water (not cytoplasm) tends to break down proteins. So, a watery solution, a warm little pond is the answer? It is a major problem.

"The precise events giving rise to the RNA world remain unclear. As we have seen, investigators have proposed many hypotheses, but evidence in Favour of each of them is fragmentary at best. The full details of how the RNA world, and life, emerged may not be revealed in the near future." Orgel (14)

​The first cell could not start with DNA because there could have been errors in the order of the nucleotide (A,T,C,G) bases. There is a correction mechanism with the DNA polymerase which corrects the errors.  Think of a spell corrector on your computer. The DNA and the correction mechanisms (enzymes) would have had to randomly appear together. The DNA stores the information of all cell functions. But the real problem is not the material (molecules) but the coded information, 3.2 billion bits of information, all in correct order. Where did the information, the code, come from. When we see information (words in a book, a message written in the sand, 3.2 billion bits of information in DNA) we know that only a mind produces information. Whose mind produced the DNA information?

Martin Moe (12) said, “A century of sensational discoveries in the biological sciences has taught us that life arises only from life” (1981, pg. 36)

​George Simpson (17) said, “There is no serious doubt that biogenesis is the rule, that life comes only from other life, that a cell, the unit of life, is always and exclusively the product or offspring of another cell”. (Simpson and Beck, 1965).

Moore and Slusher (13) said, “Historically the point of view that life comes only from life has been so well established through the facts revealed by experiment that it is called the Law of Biogenesis.” 1974).

If atheism is true, then abiogenesis must also be true. The one who believes in abiogenesis is stubbornly pushing the facts of science and logic aside. "They cannot let a divine foot in the door". Richard Lewontin. (8)

Hoyle and Wickramasinghe have this view on abiogenesis: “Precious little in the way of biochemical evolution could have happened on the Earth. It is easy to show that the two thousand or so enzymes that span the whole of life could not have evolved on Earth. If one counts the number of trial assemblies of amino acids that are needed to give rise to the enzymes, the probability of their discovery by random shuffling’s turns out to be 10 to the 40,000th power”. (Evolution from Space 1981, (5)

All questions regarding the origin of first life do not consider a successful duplication of a cell.

“At present science has no satisfactory answer to the question of the origin of life on the earth. Perhaps the appearance of life on the earth is a miracle” Jastrow, Robert Until the Sun Dies, 1977.

Spontaneous generation is a “matter of faith on the part of the biologist … The evidence for what did happen is not available”. George Kerkut (7)

“Science should support the correct view, not contradict it. What does the evidence say?” Jeff Miller, (9)

“Why are Americans allowing their children to be subjected to such anti-scientific propaganda? Why are parents not outraged that their students are wasting valuable class time learning about such speculation, rather than learning true science?” Jeff Miller, (9)

The atheist starts with the belief that a creator does not exist. Only nature exists. The atheist considers abiogenesis as the basis of new life, contrary to the evidence of science. It is not that the Atheist does not believe but will not believe. Since there is no God and life had an origin, abiogenesis must be true.

​

References

1. Creation.com
2. Davies, Paul. Davies, Paul (2006), New Scientist, 192[2578]:35,
3. Einstein, Albert.
4. Gordon-Smith. Origin of LIfe: Oparin-Haldance Hypothesis, 2003
5. Hoyle, Fred and Chandra Wickramasinghe (1981), Evolution from Space
6. Jastrow, Robert (1977), Until the Sun Dies
7. Kahn Academy. Hypothesis about the origins of life.
8. Kerkut, Gerald A. (1960), The Implications of Evolution
9. Lewotin, Richard. They Will not Allow a Divine Foot in the Door. The Times Examiner. 2003
10. Miller, Jeff. The Law of Biogenesis, Part I, 2012
11. Miller, Jeff. The Law of Biogenesis, Part II, 2012
12. Miller, Stanley. 1953 A Production of Amino Acids Under Possible Primitive Earth Conditions,” Science, 117[3046]:528-529, May 15.
13. Moe, Martin. “A century of sensational discoveries in the biological sciences has taught us that life arises only from life” (1981, pg. 36)
14. Moore and Slusher. “Historically the point of view that life comes only from life has been so well established through the facts revealed by experiment that it is called the Law of Biogenesis.” 1974).
15. Orgel, Leslie. Ibid. P.336, see Quotable quote: Primeval soup-failed paradign.
16. Sagan, Carl. carl sagan The miller-urey experiment is now recognized as the single most - Search (bing.com)
17. Seiglie, Mario. Prove Evolution False - Even Without the Bible. 2012
18. Simpson, George. “There is no serious doubt that biogenesis is the rule, that life comes only from other life, that a cell, the unit of life, is always and exclusively the product or offspring of another cell”. (Simpson and Beck, 1965).
19. Tour, James. YouTube video
20. Truman, R., What biology textbooks never told you about evolution.
21. Turek, Frank. Cross Examined.