this i find rather interesting to comment on solely b/c u can grasp the fundamentals of evolution, and adhere to its possibility without much doubt, yet somewhat shun the concept that the very first lifeform on this planet arose from chemicals.
This is why: u initially said many minute mutations in the genes of an organism led to development of an eye. A precise eye. The bad ones led to most likely inferior outcomes thus causing the organism to die out, however the beneficial mutation caused a thriving, so to speak. If somewhere along this chain of events a bad mutation that became permanent, the same would happen as the beforementioned causing its inevitable fate.
This leads me to my idea that over the course of millions of years, the appropriate chemical composition, AND quantity of such enabled perhaps.... the very first organic compound, a monosaccharide. this conglomeration of elements probably occured in a hot spring of sorts, where these three elements were abundant. Among the simple sugar, a lipid could form. With some nitrogen and sulfur a protein, altho highly improbable so early in the game, COULD exist.
In this plethora of primordial (i love that word) molecules, several may have been put together to create the ver first organism.
The jump from nothing, to a chair is not easy to believe. But if there were other steps... it would be more likely, correct?
It is known that the prokaryotic cell was the very first lifeform to exist. Such a complex organism if u think about the depth it has....
peptidoglycen.... one chromosome, however minute, STILL relays data throughout the cell via rna. My god! !
But was it the first? There must have been something before this b/c evolution from a chemical into a tangible, living cell is just as difficult to swallow as creationism.
lost my concentration turkeys done. happy thanksgiving