Did life start only once?

Nice to be here, totally new! Many interesting discussions.Suggestion then, to a thread!I would like to hear your opinion on this subject and some more. If this has been up before and widely discussed, please tell and redirect me to the threads, I have searched and read quite much in here.I know from discussions in here that most of the Darwinists only apply natural selection on life AFTER its own creation (there wasn’t life before life therefore no natural selection could occur, logical). However... is it a widely accepted idea that life only started once? I mean.. is there any evidence that it started more than once? As far as I know there are no such evidence. There are no creatures crawling around that are fundamentally different from ours. This is really strange. I mean... evolution through natural selection creates (or evolves) new species all the time. And yes, even if it doesn’t apply to creation OF life the whole thing seems strange. Why is a winning concept (evolution) so rare? Why don’t we see other kinds of life emerging? Why don’t we see some traces from "flawed life" that didn’t make it due to some critical flaw in another line of evolution (another combination of amino acids with completely different ways to ours)?I find it hard to believe that life only came to be once and the only time it did... it somehow got so lucky that we sit here and wonder why that is. I am baffled. That’s why I ask. And I must point out that I am not a big fan of either ID or creationism. Sometimes I have a hard time accepting evolution in every aspect... I believe some things (not going to debate that in this thread) lies in the future to explain fully. I do believe in the scientific method for exploring the world wherever it leads us. 500 years ago most of today’s stuff would be magic and the same for us in 500 years. Edited by Explorer, : No reason given.

Thank you for your answers!Well... seems to me the most logical reason why we don’t see another line of evolution is that it would be extremely hard for an up comer to win or compete over something that already have taken its place on the planet. I thought of this too at some time and it really is one possible explanation to why we don’t see some other kinds of life surviving to the point where we could observe it. And yes, it could be the fact that "the battle" between the lines of evolution were fought long time ago just after the right time and the right conditions for life... leading to our line out coming as a winner. However . wouldn’t it be possible for emerging life to become parasitic on our line of evolution? Are there any possible candidates for such an “attack”?Shortly , I thought of this.. long time ago I read that there are some things that don’t qualify fully as life-forms but bear a close resemblance. I cant remember their names or what they were. Is it possible that such things are the remainings of an attempt to start life? Our beaten and "sleeping relatives". Does anyone know what it might have been?Granny Magda:

quote:

---

Over this time they increased the oxygen content of the atmosphere. It might be that the process that originally started life is not possible under modern conditions.

---

That would lead to severe difficulties for other lines of life IF life depends on very unique conditions to emerge.

quote:

---

On the other hand, maybe we'll eventually find a hydrothermal vent or cave system with life forms unrelated to our own. Who knows?

---

Yes... like in horror-movies “The cave”.