No, the experiment does not prove there was a creator and it also does not prove that life could have originated in this manner either. Actually, it does not really prove anything when it comes to the origins of life. It really only proves what happens if you connect together a bunch of glass tubes and flasks, mix in certain chemicals, add electricity and allow for periods of heating and cooling and then do this for week
.
There are so many assumptions going on in this experiment that it is not even funny. They assumed what the original atmosphere was like on an "early earth". Frankly, we don't know. They assumed the amounts of checmicals, electricity, etc. Once again, we do not know. Even the same Wikipedia site states something similar to this:
Quote:
There have been a number of objections to the implications derived from these experiments. It is now believed that Earth's original atmosphere did not contain as large a quantity of reducing molecules as was thought at the time:
The following statement also shows more of the scientists assumptions:
Quote:
Although lightning storms are thought to have been very common in the primordial atmosphere, they are not thought to have been as common as the amount of electricity used by the Miller-Urey experiment may imply.
And, has someone else has pointed out, this experiment, for intents and purposes, was a failure. Considering the fact that many scientists dispute what the "original" atmosphere was then what point does this experiment really prove? Like I said before, it only proves what you get under the conditions the scientists provided.
