Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 121 (8774 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-28-2017 12:58 PM
368 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Tom Larkin
Post Volume:
Total: 814,800 Year: 19,406/21,208 Month: 2,165/3,111 Week: 386/574 Day: 41/59 Hour: 4/6

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev12
3
456Next
Author Topic:   Self-Replicating Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part II)
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 31 of 84 (743726)
12-03-2014 8:50 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by RAZD
12-03-2014 6:01 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
Hi RAZD

Interesting thread except that 99% of it is over my head as I haven't taken a biology course in my life.

However I don't think it makes a case for doing away with God. If we assume that everything that is theorized by these scientists is correct then what have we got? We would know how life was formed. We know that there was a natural process that resulted in the natural process of evolution. However we still require a process that resulted in the process that resulted in the process that resulted in the process of evolution, or as atheists like to say it is turtles all the way down.

It certainly makes a case against instant creation but it does not make a case against creation itself. It is a theory of how life came into existence. It still does not answer the question of whether or not there was a prime mover behind any or all of the processes required.

It still boils down to what you choose to believe.

Choice one. An infinite number of natural processes that happened by chance that eventually resulted in RAZD.

Choice two. We are the result, regardless of how many natural process were required, of an intelligent prime mover(s).

Frankly in order to take choice one requires huge faith, in that you have to believe that the chemicals required somehow came into existence in the first place. Then we needed to have all of the correct elements required, as per the theory in the video, to result in sentient beings able to understand the process and also beings capable of understanding and responding to a moral code.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by RAZD, posted 12-03-2014 6:01 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-03-2014 9:08 PM GDR has responded
 Message 35 by AZPaul3, posted 12-03-2014 10:15 PM GDR has responded
 Message 38 by RAZD, posted 12-03-2014 10:53 PM GDR has responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15947
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.4


(1)
Message 32 of 84 (743727)
12-03-2014 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by GDR
12-03-2014 8:50 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
RAZD didn't mention God, let alone doing away with him. That was your contribution.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 8:50 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 9:31 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 33 of 84 (743728)
12-03-2014 9:31 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Dr Adequate
12-03-2014 9:08 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
Dr Adquate writes:

RAZD didn't mention God, let alone doing away with him. That was your contribution.

Fair enough. I actually should have used prime mover without being specific about the prime mover. Certainly the video and the intent of the original post was to argue for an explanation of abiogenesis that negates the idea of a prime mover.

My argument is that it fails to do that. It doesn't give evidence, even theoretically, for or against a prime mover IMHO.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-03-2014 9:08 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by jar, posted 12-03-2014 9:34 PM GDR has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 29149
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 34 of 84 (743729)
12-03-2014 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by GDR
12-03-2014 9:31 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
But there is no evidence of a prime mover and frankly, to speculate that humans were a desired outcome just makes the prime mover look stupid.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 9:31 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 10:43 PM jar has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


(1)
Message 35 of 84 (743730)
12-03-2014 10:15 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by GDR
12-03-2014 8:50 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
Frankly in order to take choice one requires huge faith, in that you have to believe that the chemicals required somehow came into existence in the first place.

We already know that. See the Recombination era and Big Bang nucleosynthesis then see stellar nucleosynthesis and that will cover the elements.

Then we needed to have all of the correct elements required ...

Elements (atoms - periodic table) covered above.

Then look up organic molecules in space or astrochemistry. Tons of the stuff that we see as simple organic compounds (molecules) spontaneously form in the thick hydrogen clouds of the stellar nurseries (It's what carbon does all by itself when a spattering of other elements that just happens to be hanging around - there really is a natural reason we are a carbon-based life form).

... result in sentient beings able to understand the process and also beings capable of understanding and responding to a moral code.

Ahh, yes. Evolution. Lovely stuff.

It still boils down to what you choose to believe.

And so it does. Now the chirality issue is on its way to being settled. This just takes away one more gap in which to hide a god. One less "ignorance" in which to claim majik.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 8:50 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 10:50 PM AZPaul3 has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 36 of 84 (743731)
12-03-2014 10:43 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by jar
12-03-2014 9:34 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
jar writes:

But there is no evidence of a prime mover and frankly, to speculate that humans were a desired outcome just makes the prime mover look stupid.

I didn't claim there was any evidence of a prime mover. I'm just saying that the argument presented isn't evidence one way or another.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by jar, posted 12-03-2014 9:34 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by jar, posted 12-04-2014 7:52 AM GDR has responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 37 of 84 (743732)
12-03-2014 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by AZPaul3
12-03-2014 10:15 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
AZPaul3 writes:

And so it does. Now the chirality issue is on its way to being settled. This just takes away one more gap in which to hide a god. One less "ignorance" in which to claim majik.

You keep trying to use endless processes as evidence of the non-existence of a prime mover. It will always require an endless series of processes. The question that remains unevidenced and unanswered is whether or not the processes were the result of a prime mover or not. We all form our own conclusions and believe what we believe by faith.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by AZPaul3, posted 12-03-2014 10:15 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Pressie, posted 12-04-2014 12:08 AM GDR has responded
 Message 40 by AZPaul3, posted 12-04-2014 12:18 AM GDR has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18819
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 38 of 84 (743733)
12-03-2014 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by GDR
12-03-2014 8:50 PM


Re: News to Chiral you up
Hi GDR

It certainly makes a case against instant creation but it does not make a case against creation itself. It is a theory of how life came into existence. It still does not answer the question of whether or not there was a prime mover behind any or all of the processes required.

I agree.

Choice two. We are the result, regardless of how many natural process were required, of an intelligent prime mover(s).

See Panspermic Pre-Biotic Molecules - Life's Building Blocks (Part I)

"We are star dust ... " (song by Joni Mitchell written for Woodstock sung by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young)

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 8:50 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 12:42 AM RAZD has responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 1696
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010
Member Rating: 2.9


(1)
Message 39 of 84 (743740)
12-04-2014 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by GDR
12-03-2014 10:50 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
GDR writes:

The question that remains unevidenced and unanswered is whether or not the processes were the result of a prime mover or not.

Why a prime mover? Why not many prime movers?

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 10:50 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 12:31 AM Pressie has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


Message 40 of 84 (743741)
12-04-2014 12:18 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by GDR
12-03-2014 10:50 PM


Re: News to Chiral about
You keep trying to use endless processes as evidence of the non-existence of a prime mover.

What endless processes? We know what a lot of the processes are, we are learning the answers to the ones we didn't fully understand, and we keep learning more about the ones we still do not fully understand. Nowhere in any of this has there been any kind of majik or USDA Prime mover evident or necessary.

It is not me trying to use "endless processes" to evidence some non-existence. The preponderance of the data on the processes we already know pretty much points in that direction as it is.

It is you who says that since we do not know all there is to know therefore there might be your Prime Beef in there somewhere. So there is still somewhere to hide your god. Good for you.

To hearken back to a discussion some time ago, you really do need our ignorance to harbor your faith. You're in luck. We will always be ignorant of something.

Religion requires ignorance. I am not questioning your personal level of intellect but, in general, oh, that really does work on so many different levels.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by GDR, posted 12-03-2014 10:50 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 12:50 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 41 of 84 (743742)
12-04-2014 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Pressie
12-04-2014 12:08 AM


Re: News to Chiral about
Pressie writes:

Why a prime mover? Why not many prime movers?

I you go back to my first post I gave this as choice 2.

Choice two. We are the result, regardless of how many natural process were required, of an intelligent prime mover(s).


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Pressie, posted 12-04-2014 12:08 AM Pressie has not yet responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 42 of 84 (743744)
12-04-2014 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by RAZD
12-03-2014 10:53 PM


Re: News to Chiral you up
Hi RAZD

Here is a concluding quote from the article you quoted.

quote:
From these information sections it seems to me that the building blocks needed for beginning the creation of life were plentiful, not just on Earth but in space in general and from the earliest of times. Probably they have been around since long before even the Earth formed from the cosmic debris left behind by the life and death cycle of previous stars and planets, back to the beginning of time. These "seeds of life" no doubt extend through the far reaches of the universe as well as the depths of time (cue Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young ... "We are star dust ...").

It also seems to me that the natural processes for forming more complex structures from those basic building blocks were likely prevalent on the earth 4.5 billion years ago in a variety of forms, levels of completion and locations. We end with a scenario that has a random combination of plentiful and multitudinous organic molecules forming amino acids all over the earth, with a membranous system to contain and concentrate those molecules and their interactions within a protocell type capsule. We also see that random combination of plentiful and multitudinous amino acids into peptides and proteins is feasible, and that concentration and recombination within the membranous protocells enhances the probability that random combinations of them into the first "replicators" (the predecessors to RNA and DNA) is not as far fetched as it seemed at first. A simple building block process where the probability of a successful combination is almost inevitable: it is no longer a matter of "if" but of "when" it will occur under these conditions ... and once self replication occurs the frequency of replication will necessarily outpace the random action, and replicators that are faster and stronger will outpace their competition ... life seems inevitable when given the conditions for life.

That is my take on the probability of life on earth.


He says things like, "building blocks needed for beginning the creation of life were plentiful", or "under these conditions". It simply assumes the building blocks needed", or the right conditions exist. What process was required for those materials or conditions to exist. What process was required for that process and so on. All of these theoretical processes are based on pre-existing conditions that are simply assumed to exist without explanation.

Your argument for the non-existence of a prime mover(s) is as unevidenced as is Faith's argument for an inerrant Bible. It is simply a belief in either case.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by RAZD, posted 12-03-2014 10:53 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by AZPaul3, posted 12-04-2014 1:20 AM GDR has responded
 Message 54 by RAZD, posted 12-04-2014 1:30 PM GDR has responded

    
GDR
Member
Posts: 4241
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005


Message 43 of 84 (743745)
12-04-2014 12:50 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by AZPaul3
12-04-2014 12:18 AM


Re: News to Chiral about
AZPaul3 writes:

What endless processes? We know what a lot of the processes are, we are learning the answers to the ones we didn't fully understand, and we keep learning more about the ones we still do not fully understand. Nowhere in any of this has there been any kind of majik or USDA Prime mover evident or necessary.

As I have already repeated I am not arguing that there is evidence for a prime mover. I am simply saying that what has been presented isn't evidence that a prime mover(s) doesn't exist either.

AZPaul3 writes:

It is you who says that since we do not know all there is to know therefore there might be your Prime Beef in there somewhere. So there is still somewhere to hide your god. Good for you.

To hearken back to a discussion some time ago, you really do need our ignorance to harbor your faith. You're in luck. We will always be ignorant of something.

I'm not hiding my belief anywhere any more than you are. It is belief, it isn't knowledge in either case.

AZPaul3 writes:

Religion requires ignorance. I am not questioning your personal level of intellect but, in general, oh, that really does work on so many different levels.

All belief requires ignorance whether it be religion or atheism, and it does indeed work on many different levels. If there is no ignorance their is certain knowledge and neither of us have that.


He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.

Micah 6:8


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by AZPaul3, posted 12-04-2014 12:18 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by AZPaul3, posted 12-04-2014 1:31 AM GDR has responded
 Message 48 by AZPaul3, posted 12-04-2014 3:18 AM GDR has responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


Message 44 of 84 (743746)
12-04-2014 1:20 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by GDR
12-04-2014 12:42 AM


Re: News to Chiral you up
All of these theoretical processes are based on pre-existing conditions that are simply assumed to exist without explanation.

No they are not. Just because someone has not walked you through each step back does not mean the conditions are assumed or the explanation is missing. This is a number of years of college courses and a whole lot of outside reading to understand in the level of detail you seem to want.

The processes from Big Bang nucleosynthesis through stellar nucleosynthesis through quantum chemistry through stellar formation, planetary accretion, evidence of early earth environment and chemistry all show that the building blocks needed and the right conditions did indeed exist to a first approximation. We are as certain as we can be without having been there at the time. That is not assumption but the logical and evidenced extension of the data. These are facts.

We know the facts of how the building blocks formed, where they came from, how they got here and the conditions they were in at the time. Now a hypothesis of abiogenesis has gotten stronger by direct experiment with chirality. Not complete, but stronger.

Your contention that these pre-existing conditions are just weakly assumed is not correct.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 12:42 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 2:19 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3428
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


Message 45 of 84 (743747)
12-04-2014 1:31 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by GDR
12-04-2014 12:50 AM


Re: News to Chiral about
I am simply saying that what has been presented isn't evidence that a prime mover(s) doesn't exist either.

Sure it is evidence. Not proof, for sure, since we cannot prove a negative, but the evidence we do have, and there is a lot of it, tells us that some prime something or other is not necessary. The processes we already know about, which are considerable, don't need one. The processes we are closing in on do not appear to need one. Why should anyone assume the processes we don't completely understand should need one?

Again, since no one can prove a negative the evidence does not "prove" your brand of initial poof-maker does not exist, it just very strongly indicates that one is superfluous to what we know has taken place.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 12:50 AM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by GDR, posted 12-04-2014 2:27 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Prev12
3
456Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017