So organic molecules spontaneously combined to form amino acids, which combined to form proteins, which spontaneously combined to form DNA, RNA, and cell membranes, etc.
No. Amino acids, which already existed because of other endothermic reactions, eventually polymerized in lipid acid pockets, into peptides. That's it.
Fat (lipid acid) turns into bubbly pockets. Ever cook spaghetti? Sometimes stuff gets in those pockets. Amino acids are already proven to exist at this point. So they got in there, and formed peptide bonds cause that's what amino acids when there is heat. Those bonded amino acids could not escape because the surface tension of the fat pockets.
That's it. That's all. THAT is the first life form. RNA? DNA? cell membranes? None of those are necessary.
Somehow the first cell formed, which reproduced, and natural selection caused it to evolve into all the life forms we see today.
No. The cell didn't evolve for a while. At least, not the complex cell structures we know of today.
Somehow simple molecules have to assemble themselves into more complex molecules (the ?building blocks of life?),
Carbon-based molecules have a tendancy to do this. Carbon is kinda a slut in the chemical world.
which assemble themselves into the first living thing, which reproduces itself, in order to get the evolutionary process started. Molecules will not assemble themselves this way because they have to obey the laws of thermodynamics.
Your understanding of the second law of thermodynamics is flawed. Horribly horribly flawed.
Also saying something that cannot happen but occurs millions of times a day in your body only shows your ignorance on the subject. But... here's the solution that solves your quandry. It's two words.
Some chemical reactions require energy from an outside source to fuel them. Many reactions essential to life are endothermic reactions.
You should make a note of that, because the second law of thermodynamics only states that entropy must increase in closed systems
. Once you have an endothermic reaction, you must also include the energy source, and any thing connected to or involved in that energy source.
In other words, you cannot take a chemical in a vacuum and say it cannot do things, and call it a closed system, when it is not, in fact, the sum total of what is going on there.
DNA molecules contain heat in the form of chemical energy. As everyone who listened to the expert testimony at the O.J. Simpson trial knows, DNA molecules are fragile. The slightest bit of external energy breaks DNA molecules into simpler molecules, allowing the heat to escape into the environment. Energy breaks molecules apart, allowing them to release even more energy. An unlit candle just sits there, holding its heat in the form of chemical energy until you bring a lighted match close to it. The warmth of the match breaks the wax molecules apart, releasing heat in the form of warmth, which provides the energy to break more wax molecules apart, which keeps the reaction going.
Why are you talking about DNA like it's somehow relevant to the point of abigenesis? Did you watch the video I provided?
Organic molecules in food remain intact longer in the freezer than they do in the refrigerator. They remain intact longer in the refrigerator than they do sitting on the kitchen counter. That?s why you keep your most perishable food in the freezer or refrigerator. Heat eventually breaks downs DNA, RNA, sugars, proteins, and amino acids. It doesn?t put them together. Chefs know this basic fact.
Actually, that has a lot more to do with this thing called 'bacteria growth'. You don't freeze stuff to prevent protein breakdown. You freeze stuff to prevent salmonella, botulism, and other such things.
Alternatively, you can accomplish the exact same thing by keeping the temperature above 167 degrees Farhenheit.
By the way, I've done my time in a kitchen.
Abiogenesis violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics because it requires heat to organize itself into localized chemical energy. Simple molecules have to combine into complex molecules which store more heat. Heat doesn?t naturally flow from cold places to hot places.
Okay. Now you're full of shit.
First off, reactions that require heat to start, and then give off energy (exothermic reactions) are completely possible in modern chemistry and physics. Proof: FIRE. What happens is the energy from one reaction provides the energy necessary to start another reaction. So, the heat given off by one of them reactions you claim is impossible, would then radiate, and would trigger other similar reactions, in what is called a 'chain reaction.'
But, that's not what's likely to be happening:
Secondly, reactions that require heat, but absorb energy (endothermic reactions) change heat into the energy of the chemical bonds. The heat is gone, and the temperature of the resultant molecule is less than that of the original components. As a result, you have a resultant molecule that is colder than the environment that is warm enough to start the reaction. Thus, you do not have the problem of energy travelling from cold to hot.
More over, this is actually not relevant to the current theory of abiogenesis.
Stanley Miller knew that he would have to build a machine that would assemble simple gas molecules into amino acids, and he knew that this machine would need an external source of energy to force the molecules to combine. He initially used a spark for this purpose, but other forms of energy, such as ultraviolet light, were later used in similar experiments. But Stanley Miller ran into some trouble. Miller?s electric spark broke molecules apart faster than it created them. That is why he had to get the molecules he created out of the spark-filled chamber before the next spark. Stanley Miller proved organic molecules (amino acids, proteins, sugars, etc.) don?t occur naturally in sufficient purity and abundance to sustain life.
Which is absolutely awesome, and has nothing to do with the CURRENT THEORY OF ABIOGENESIS
Protip: They actually created life. Maybe you should actually watch the video.
So long as Abiogenisis breaks the Second Law of Thermodynamics, it is dead on arrival.
It doesn't, but that's okay. You didn't watch the video. Go watch the video.
As long as Evolutionists require Abiogenisis to be fact in text books and in their lectures, then Evolution will be dead on arrival.
Evolution is not predecated on ABiogenesis. And, so long as you make false claims like 'Abiogenesis breaks the laws of thermodynamics' then I'll say to you 'Abiogenesis has been replicated in a lab, and as it has -occured-, it does not break the laws of thermodynamics.'
I'll reiterate this to you.
Scientists. Actually. Did. It.
And you need to learn Second Law of Thermodynamics better, because in your understanding, the very things you mentioned to stop amino acid breakdown... refridgerators, and freezers... are impossible. Cause isn't that drawing heat from a cold source (the inside of the unit) to an outside source? (the very hot cooling racks in the back)
There's more to it than heat.