Can you recommend a good read?
I can recommend anything by Robert Hazen from Carnegie Institute for Science.
He is an excellent lecturer and lays out the evolutionary processes that start with purely chemical reactions to the emergence of self-duplicating polymers and the ability to seek energy for maintaining homeostasis.
The lecturer who exposed me to the fundamentals in a clear and persuasive argument.
Hazen has several in-depth lectures on Youtube.
You sound like a fundamental Christian/Muslim
Hell, no! Life was born in hell, not heaven.
Information.
EDIT: (Abiogenesis) I can see "internet" articles saying basically what you're saying but it isn't even a scientific theory.
That is because you are missing the axiomatic fact that cells all living organisms are born by and perform abiogenesis every second of their
lives.
Living cells are composed of non-living molecules, so every time a cell divides the process creates a living object from non-living constituent parts, that is the definition of abiogenesis.
The Molecular Composition of Cells
Cells are composed of water, inorganic ions, and carbon-containing (organic) molecules. Water is the most abundant molecule in cells, accounting for 70% or more of total cell mass. Consequently, the interactions between water and the other constituents of cells are of central importance in biological chemistry.
The critical property of water in this respect is that it is a polar molecule, in which the hydrogen atoms have a slight positive charge and the oxygen has a slight negative charge (
Figure 2.1). Because of their polar nature, water molecules can form hydrogen bonds with each other or with other polar molecules, as well as interacting with positively or negatively charged ions. As a result of these interactions, ions and polar molecules are readily soluble in water (
hydrophilic).
In contrast, nonpolar molecules, which cannot interact with water, are poorly soluble in an aqueous environment (
hydrophobic). Consequently, nonpolar molecules tend to minimize their contact with water by associating closely with each other instead. As discussed later in this chapter, such interactions of polar and nonpolar molecules with water and with each other play crucial roles in the formation of biological structures, such as cell membranes.
more ......
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK9879/#
A non-living biochemical polymer.
RNA
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170712201054.htm#
Summary: A new method to measure the half-life of RNA molecules has now been created by researchers. Their study revealed that commonly used methods provide distorted results and that RNA molecules live an average of only two minutes, ten times shorter than previously assumed. Jul 12, 2017
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/07/170712201054.htm#
A more complex non-living biochemical polymer.
DNA
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mysterious-retron-dna-helps-scientists-edit-human-genes/
Neither of these bio-chemical polymers are living things, yet their chemical instructions produce living cells!
Lets assume that all life for all its variety, must have something in common, i.e. living cells, ok?
How and from what are cells made?
This common denominator has been named LUCA (Last Universal Common Ancestor)
Who or what is LUCA?
by
Stephanie McClellan0, 3 April 2013
Is there an evolutionary starting point and a primordial organism from which all modern life descended?
Charles Darwin proposed the existence of an evolutionary starting point and a primordial organism from which all modern life descended. This started the search for a last universal common ancestor or ‘LUCA’. In the 20th century the theory gained weight after the genetic code was deciphered and found to be universal across all life on Earth.
So what sort of beast was LUCA? Several scenarios have been proposed by molecular evolutionists. LUCA was most likely a single-celled organism that lived between three and four billion years ago.
It may have used RNA both to store genetic information like DNA, and to catalyse chemical reactions like an enzyme protein. Similar to some species of archaea – ancient and very tough microbes – LUCA would have been highly resistant to extreme environments. Some scientists have even suggested that LUCA emerged close to deep sea hydrothermal vents (above).
Still, there may not be one LUCA as such, but an indefinable evolutionary starting point for contemporary life. One person who believed this was legendary late microbiologist Carl Woese. He suggested that all life evolved through horizontal gene transfer between ancient organisms as opposed to solely vertical evolution. And so the question of where we ultimately came from may never be answered exactly, but the glimpses that science gives us will no doubt continue to inspire – as with any good family story.
https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/120606/who-what-luca/#
Orignally, there were probably several locations on the surface where life had roots, but there is only one location that was relatively shielded from all surface activities including sunlight . And that was deep in the protection of water in the oceans, on the ocean floor, where "black smokers" were spewing mineral rich plumes of dynamically interactive minerals, increasing the rate of polymer formation such as RNA.
Therefore, unless a better model can be presented, we must assume that "life" originated from Earth's natural chemistry and dynamic (violent) conditions .[/QUOTE]
