Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   abiogenesis
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 19 of 297 (543597)
01-19-2010 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by slevesque
01-19-2010 1:34 PM


Got to side with you, Slevesque, here. I cannot see the point of this argument. Using abiogenesis in a non-naturalistic sense is simply confusing and is the non-creationist way of getting back at creationist bullshit regarding the word evolution (cosmological, chemical, etc.)
If a creationist states that abiogenesis is impossible, it's utterly counterproductive to retort with "well, how did God make people then?" The response should be - "so, what you are saying is that you don't believe that life can naturally arise from what we would consider non-living material."
If it really is the case that naturalistic means cannot* bring about life, that in no way stops the great djinn from popping a rabbit into existence by twitching its nose.
* I have to say that to me it so damn obvious that life will arise from the correct natural conditions, that I find it hard writing that conditional clause!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by slevesque, posted 01-19-2010 1:34 PM slevesque has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 193 of 297 (551180)
03-21-2010 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by marc9000
03-21-2010 4:32 PM


Re: The Discovery Institute's pet "Biologic Institute" ...
There is if you can unchain your mind from that very restrictive time and rearrangement realm.
it seems if it is you, my friend, that is chained to this very restictive view. Those of us who actually work (or have worked) in the area of fundemental physics have no such restrictions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by marc9000, posted 03-21-2010 4:32 PM marc9000 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by marc9000, posted 03-28-2010 3:31 PM cavediver has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 195 of 297 (551184)
03-21-2010 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by marc9000
03-21-2010 4:37 PM


Re: Theistic science?
I believe the atheism that’s in science should be balanced, but not by religion, by evidence of design.
What evidence??? What possible evidence is there of design? Every claim ever made by the ID crowd has been soundly refuted. Do you have anything new?
Is this the "science" of ID? An endless stream of "ooh, ooh, we have another gap into which we can squeeze God"? Utterly pathetic. I can just see God's face-palm each time you guys open your mouths
Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by marc9000, posted 03-21-2010 4:37 PM marc9000 has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 225 of 297 (552407)
03-28-2010 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 223 by marc9000
03-28-2010 6:57 PM


Re: Level ONE comparison: abiogenesis yes, ID unknown
A network of chemical reactions that can incrementally increase in complexity until it is as complex as life falls in the same naturalistic realm as does spontaneous generation
I'm not sure whether it is stupidity or dishonesty that gave rise to this bizarre conflation, but either way it is way beyond my ability to measure
especially since spontaneous generation is referred to in today's abiogenesis studies! We saw it in message 107;
In 1953, Stanley Miller and Harold Urey demonstrated that many simple biomolecules could be formed spontaneously.....
Did you seriously just claim that a generic use of the word "spontaneously" was actually a reference to the specific "Spontaneous Generation"???
Really? You can do that with a straight face, and claim that you are not being an idiot?
Hopefully you now understand that your terms are incorrect... ...Why should we separate abiogenesis from spontaneity? It's all naturalism!
No, what we understand is what we've always understood... that people such as yourself have either too much dishonesty or too little knowledge to be worth anything more than a target for ridicule.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 223 by marc9000, posted 03-28-2010 6:57 PM marc9000 has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024