Just my two cents (Yes, I can use cents now, the Euro's almost here!)
AFAIK, the theory (or more perhaps more correctly, the group of theories)
that attempt to describe the commencement of life from non-life come under
the heading of ABIOGENESIS ("without life beginning", I think it translates
Evoluntionary theories describe the details of what happens once that life
has arisen, not how it arises. How life started is more the realm of
chemists than naturalists to the best of my understanding.
Life on Earth could have started 4+ billion years ago from alien
space-rabbit fart for all it matters, it's only after that when Darwin
As for the beginning of the universe, I'll let a cosmologist explain
that. From what I've heard it's a very healthy field at the moment, with
many theories being put forward and much new observational data due to come
in over the next few years.
Again, it's not all that relevant to evolution, apart from providing the
enegry and chemistry that is.
Seems pretty straightforward to me (or am I completely lost here?)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:19 MDT