How would you respond to an evolutionist who says that the universe could be possibly infinite in size,

and therefore evolution wouldn't be a

miracle since it could appear anywhere. Michael, United States. Your question, Michael, surfaces

in intriguing debates over the origin of life, or abiogenesis. That term signifies the origin of biological life from non-life.

With respect to explaining abiogenesis naturalistically, there are two broad camps within the

origin of life community, which we may call

necessitism and contingentism. Necessitists hold that the origin of life is causally determined

by the laws of physics and chemistry, and therefore happens necessarily.

Contingentists hold that the origin of life is due to the interplay of many independent

causal factors and is therefore a highly improbable event.

It's fascinating that the rejection of theistic models of

abiogenesis has led some naturalistic origin of life researchers, both necessitists and contingentists,

to turn to outer space in order to support their account of life on Earth.

Astrobiology is a fascinating new discipline spurred by the discovery during the 1990s of exoplanets,

that is, planets outside our solar system. As it turns out, both necessitists and

contingentists have a vested interest in the success of astrobiology's search for life abroad.

Necessitists reason that if life is determined by nature's laws, apart from any very

special conditions, then it ought to arise easily and widely throughout the universe. They are

therefore motivated to find traces of life elsewhere in our solar system.

For example, in meteorites, or on other planets and moons. Unfortunately, for the necessitist,

no extraterrestrial traces of life have yet been detected.

For the contingentist, who is a naturalist, the enormous improbability of the origin of life on his own account prompts him to turn to outer space in an effort to make the odds of life's arising naturally on

...