OK, well let me examine this a bit. Obviously the Urey-Miller experiment put certain elements together and flashed electricity throughout, something changed, as I understand it, a fuzz type thing.
If the origin of life happened before scientists were around to observe it, how can our origin be studied with the scientific method? This question is answered in our overview of the Miller-Urey experiment.
www.statedclearly.com
Without the start of life according to reason, would evolution have taken place?
There was no "fuzz type thing". You have made that up.
The experiment showed that a
range of organic molecules, in particular amino acids, the monomers from which proteins are constructed, could arise naturally from the
inorganic chemicals present on the early Earth. That is all it was designed to explore.
Since that experiment, carried out over 70 years ago, an enormous amount has been discovered about other potential building blocks of life, from other sources. This includes a vast range of them found in carbonaceous meteorites:
Organic compounds in carbonaceous meteorites . The Miller-Urey experiment was the merely the first step in what has become a large field of prebiotic chemistry research today.
"Evolution" in the sense in which it is generally used, i.e. changes in populations of organisms that lead to formation of new species, obviously requires a population of replicating organisms to start with. In a broader sense of the word, one can speak of the change from pre-biotic chemicals to replicating organisms as an "evolution", but it would be one lying completely outside the current Theory of Evolution, as that is restricted to biology.
