Mud Of the Earth’s Crust

By Atom Bergstrom

Atom’s Blog

Plant tissue was created in mud on solid ground.

Animal tissue sprang from the resin-containing foam of the sea like Aphrodite/Venus, the goddess of love and beauty.

<>

Emanuel Revici, M.D. (Research in Physiopathology as Basis of Guided Chemotherapy, With Special Application to Cancer, 1961) wrote …

“In the first near-volcano environments, which applied to the subnuclear entities, water was relatively scarce, which explains the high concentration of the constituents in the nucleus. The mud of the Earth’s crust is richer in water, which explains the difference between the nucleus [5th Period] and the cytoplasm [4th Period], with the latter richer in water. The sea was the environment for the metazoic compartment, which explains the richness of water in this compartment. The so-called ‘internal sea’ consequently can be seen only in the metazoic compartment [3rd Period]. With the passage into the terrestrial environment with its air medium [1st and 2nd Period], the water again became scarce and had to be conserved.”

According to the same source …

“Animals can be characterized as having sodium as the cation of their metazoic compartment; from the cell level on, they have had the sea as their temporary or even permanent environment. Plants, on the other hand, have potassium as the principal cation for their metazoic compartment, indicating that, from the cell level on, they have had the earth’s crust as their environment, passing thus directly from mud to air. By their actual attachment to the soil, plants continue this relationship to the mud.”

<>

Donald E. Ingber (“The Architecture of Life,” Scientific American, Jan. 1998) wrote …

“Researchers now think biological evolution began in layers of clay, rather than in the primordial sea. Interestingly, clay is itself a porous network of atoms arranged geodesically within octahedral and tetrahedral forms. But because these octahedra and tetrahedra are not closely packed, they retain the ability to move and slide relative to one another. This flexibility apparently allows clay to catalyze many chemical reactions, including ones that may have produced the first molecular building blocks of organic life.”

<>

Richard Morris (Artificial Worlds: Computers, Complexity, and the Riddle of Life, 1999) wrote …

“The building blocks of life were present in the primeval oceans. Yet life could not have originated there. Amino acids and other chemicals were only present in relatively small quantities. As a result, the chemical reactions which would have created more complex molecules could not have taken place often. In such a dilute mixture, the basic components of life would rarely encounter each other. Furthermore, water tends to break linked amino acids apart. If any of the long chains of amino acids that we call proteins had been created, they would have disintegrated almost immediately. However, there did exist environments where the chemical reactions that led to the creation of the first living organism would have taken place more often. If the sun’s heat caused the water in a tide pool to evaporate, the solution of organic chemicals would have become more concentrated, and reactions would have taken place more frequently. Another currently popular theory pictures the chemical evolution that led to life as taking place on clay substrates. The idea is that if chemicals adhere to a two-dimensional clay surface, they will ‘meet up’ with one another more often than they will in a three-dimensional pool. It is not hard to see why this should be the case. It is a lot easier to bump into someone on a two-dimensional sidewalk than it is to collide with a bird while skydiving.”

<>

Robert M. Hazen (“Life’s Rocky Start: Air, water and rock were the only raw materials available on the early earth. The first living entities must have been fabricated from these primitive resources,” Scientific American, Apr. 2001) wrote …

“… clays can act as scaffolds for the building blocks of RNA, the molecule in living organisms that translates genetic instructions into proteins.”

<>

Matt Kaplan (“A fresh start: Life may have begun not in the sea but in some warm little freshwater pond,” New Scientist, May 11, 2002) wrote …

“‘No one in their right mind would use hot seawater [1.5 to 2 times as salty as the oceans are today] for laboratory studies of early cellular evolution,’ says biochemist David Deamer of the University of California, Santa Cruz, who is reporting the work with [Charles] Apel. ‘Yet for years we have all accepted without question that life began in a marine environment.'”

According to the same source …

“The finding wouldn’t have surprised Darwin. Over a century ago he speculated in his personal letters that the origin of life was ‘in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphorus salts, light, heat, electricity, etc. present.'”

<>

Jeff Hecht (“Primordial seas too saline for early evolution,” New Scientist, Feb. 5, 2005) wrote …

“The widely accepted idea that animal life evolved in the oceans before moving onto land is being challenged by a geologist who says the oceans were too salty and hot for that to have happened.”

According to the same source …

“The combination of salinity and high temperature would have kept oxygen levels too low to support marine animals, [Paul] Knauth [of Arizona State University in Tempe] says. He points out that the warmer and more saline water is the less oxygen dissolves in it.”

<>

When someone tells you the oceans are the foundation of life, roll up your pants because it’s too late to save your shoes.

When someone tells you the oceans are the foundation of HUMAN life, give them a Thumbs Up.
.
.