When beliefs are based in emotion, they are often persistent even after proof is offered. The longer the delusion, the harder it is to break. Do not recommend bothering with Kingman.
Okay, show me some proof I'm wrong.
Ok:
Here:
Please note that every part of this has been replicated in a lab: which means that there is absolutely no supposition, it has complete agreement with reality.
The biggest problem about Abiogenesis is not that we don't have any idea how life could ahve got started, it is that we have too many and all of them are plausible and as far as we know possible. However, this is the most likely way we know because it has been tested in labs to the point where the whole process has been observed, it is one of the simplest methods and that it does not require anything out of the ordinary to occur (we know that there are undersea vents called black smokers, we know that these chemicals did exist on primordial Earth because we can find direct evidence of them in the rocks - and we can even see them in location not on Earth too).
Abiogenesis is the theory to explain the random creation of life. Unless you can show me video or phots of millions of years ago when the first life forms supposedly randomly appeared, it will never be proven.
It has been replicated in a lab, and in less than billions of years. This means that this process is quick and is easy to produce. All the processes are known and do really occur, even outside the lab.
We know that lipid bilayers form. Our cells are lipid bilayers. Ever blown a soap bubble, that is also a lipid bilayer. So we know that this bit does occur. The chemistry of this is quite simple to explain. At one end of these fatty acids repels water and attracts oily molecules (like fatty acids), the other end is attracted to water and is repelled from oily molecules (like fatty acids). This causes them to line up with the water attractive ends outside and the oily attracted ends towards each other (as these molecules are oily). as these are flexable, they can flap around, but then if one part is moved near another part, they become attracted and cause the whole thing to curl up into a ball. You then have the shape and basic structure of a cell. A Lipid Bilayer ball - A vesicle.
Lipid bilayers can be broken, just as in the video (if you are really careful you can do it with soap bubbles. The technique I use is to hit them with a sharp blast of air, but not too hard. If you get it right (it takes some practice) you can break a bubble into multiple smaller bubbles (and besides it look very cool when you do this as it is like a martial arts move that you need to do, so it looks like you punch a bubble in half without popping it).
The small organic molecules have been shown to pass through the vesicle wall, both from the inside out and the outside in.
When a vesicle meet another they merge (just try it with soap bubbles).
There are literally hundreds of different types of Nucleotides, not just the ones life as we know it uses, and all of them work in roughly the same way. They can form long chains (polymerise) and they have an opposite member that "locks onto" its opposite. We also know that they spontaneously form as we have seen them form in both the natural environment, in the lab and even in gas clouds in space. These would have existed.
Putting all this together. We know:
1) That Fatty Acid Bilayers form and divide as stated.
2) That small organic molecules including Single Nucleotides will pass through some of these Fatty Acid Bilayer membranes
3) That Nucleotides will spontaneously polymerise into chains
3) Nucleotides will attract and hold onto it's opposite type
4) These pairs of Nucleotides will break apart at higher temperatures and reform at lower temperatures
5) Nucleotide polymers will not pass through the Fatty Acid Bilayers
6) Certain Nucleotides have chemical properties beyond just forming polymers and pairs
7) We know that this can form and occur quickly and without any outside influence
All this together means that there does not need to be an outside force creating life, it can happen spontaneously using just chemistry and physics.
If the physics and chemistry that exists today existed in the past (and there is good evidence that it did), then this could have worked.
Remember the problem is not that we don't know the way that life could have formed, it is that we have too many ways that it could have formed and we are only trying to work out which one it actually took. This is just the
best we
currently have.
It might not ahve happened this way, and it could have happened in one of dozens of ways, it is just that this is the most likely one based on the evidecne we have at the moment.