San Pedro Claver Schoo, South America, Colombia

 For me, even for many scientists it is hard to state a 
 theory that really let us know how life on earth arose. But
 it does not mean that we can take out of those many 
 theories some conclusions, that would make us understand 
 better the issue.
 
 First of all we have to be concerned that all living things
 and non-living are made up of, subatomic particles, atoms,
 molecules, organelles and cells respectively. It is well 
 kown that after cells there are other many stages until we 
 get to the biosphere. The organic molecules which make up 
 living things, are made up also by the same atoms and 
 subatomic particles that contain innorganic molecules. 
 In conclusion we can say that both inorganic and organic 
 share many common structures, but with diferent mixes and 
 conditions, which is what makes them different; when I say 
 conditions, I mean diferent types of energy that the 
 enviroment provides, such as, heat, electricity, magnetism, 
 etc... that change the basic structures. 
 
 Many theories have been taking into account to prove how 
 really life arose in earth. Usually there are two sides, 
 the divine, that states that everything on earth came from 
 the hand of God, and the scientific, that tryes to prove it 
 with proofs or in a better way, the scientific method. 
 For me the most reasonable is the scientific method because 
 it has given to me more tangible proofs. It does not mean 
 that I do not believe in God as I will explain later.
 
 Out of all those scientific theories the one that I more 
 believe is the one stated by Oparin, called Chemical 
 Evolution or Prebiotic Evoulution. He said that that the 
 oxigen-rich atmosphere that we know would not have let 
 spontaneous formation of the complex organic molecules 
 that life needs. Oparin with his Friend Haldene said that 
 the atmosphere in the young earth was low in oxigen but 
 rich in other many elements such as, methane, hydrogen gas, 
 and ammonia. With these elements and other conditions as 
 heat from rocks smashed into the forming plantet, that then 
 melted, and another elements such an iron, and nickel sank 
 to the center of the mass, where they stay molten because 
 of heat. Earth start to cool down and also elements start 
 to get combined forming compounds; the oxigen combined 
 with hydrogen to form water, carbon to form carbon dioxide, 
 and many other heavier elements. Then is said, that the 
 earth cooled enough to allow water to exist, and also 
 there was some rain. As we konw water is the perfect 
 disolver in earth, and start to disolve minerals and 
 other elements, until a weakly salty ocean was formed. 
 This weakly salty ocean was getting different energies 
 from: lightning from storms, heat from volcanoes, 
 and a big intensity of ultraviolet light from the sun, 
 knowing that in those times there was not such a powerful 
 ozone layer because, elements were not as powerful as today, 
 because they were just being created and raising it's 
 concentration on the earth.
 
 As we know this theory by Oparin and his colleague Haldane, 
 was tested by Stanley Miller and his adviser Harold Urey of 
 the University from Chicago. They create a gizmo that 
 could recreate the situation of the earth described by 
 Oparin and Haldane; the test was succesful and they colud 
 create some simple organic molecules such as, aminoacids 
 (molecule from where proteins are built), adenosin 
 triphosphate, short proteins, and other molecules. 
 
 For me this is the most believeable theory, but as always, 
 as we get more theories to help us to understand things 
 better, more questions arose; who knows if the condition of 
 the earth was actually like Oparin said?, there are many 
 hypotesis but not sure truths. For me believing in this 
 theory is no rejecting the existence of God, there are 
 things that science and humans can not explain, and maybe 
 will not be explained, that makes me think that there is a 
 divine power. Also suposing that we can say that some 
 theory is really true, for example Oparin's, who in the 
 universe really started the first amount of energy, when 
 there was nothig?, who knows?.
 
 The only thing that I want to say, is that there are many 
 points of view out there, as many different people trying 
 to find the truth about life. We, as open minded and 
 cosmopolitan as we shlould be, must be in open to 
 different ideas and concepts, and accept that we can take 
 good points from others to complement ours. We can not 
 narrow our minds to the truth that we believe is the only 
 truth; as long as people are trying with moral values and 
 good intetions to help us understand life better, I think 
 we should contribute, or, do you think you have the absolute 
 truth?.
 
 
 JUAN FELIPE GALVIS
 pgalvis@hotmail.com
 
 Ps: Sorry if I posted twice but I had to fix it because the
 first one was unreadable. Thanks for your understanding.