Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   the source of life
Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 8 of 211 (495515)
01-23-2009 5:31 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by homunculus
01-22-2009 1:57 AM


Hi Homunculus! Welcome to EvC.
Let me give you some things to consider, concerning your remarks:
First, I would like to give attention to the observational control that it is necessary for organic life to produce life. Not having laid claim to the impossibility of spontaneous self-generating organic bio genesis, but the observational rule is dependent on an organic source for life, requiring something living to produce and give life.
Well, we do have some observation to suggest that life can indeed come from non-life: when we start digging into the earth's layers, the deeper you go (back in time), the less complex the remains of lifeforms seem to become. The trend is obvious. Until at some point NO remains can be found anymore. In the absence of evidence for some creator (aliens or Gods or whatever), this leads to the conclusion that first there must have been only "non-life", which somehow brought on "life". That is simply what the evidence tells us at this point.
The trouble with bio genesis is identifying the substantial variables. If organic life is capable of spontaneous generation, then we would see it today
This is less obvious than it may seem. One thing to consider is that life itself has greatly transformed the environment. The earth looks completely different from what it might have looked like at the time when abiogenesis supposedly happened. The oxygen in the atmosphere, for one, would not be here without life, but there are countless other examples. It might very well be that life metaphorically "kicks away the ladder on which it stands"; i.e. it destroys the circumstances that were suitable for giving rise to it.
Another thing to consider is that any new lifeform that tries to come into being, is faced with fearce competition from life that has had a headstart of billions of years of evolution to adapt to its environment. This in contrast with the first life which had NO competition at all. It might be practically impossible to overcome that burden.
We don't know these things for sure, but they are certainly reasonable considerations.
and supposing, the observational universe does not hold claim to spontaneous generation anywhere.
I wouldn't use this as an argument. Let's say you're sitting in your chair watching TV when you suddenly remember that you lost your carkeys. Your look around on your chair without leaving it, you search your pockets... but don't find any keys.
Would you jump to the definitive conclusion that you lost your keys forever?
Of course not! You haven't even stood up from your chair. You didn't look behind all the furniture in the room. You haven't looked in the car. You haven't checked out your trousers in the washing machine. Etc. etc.
The point is: it makes little sense to declare that life/abiogenesis are unique, when we haven't even properly checked out our own solarsystem, let alone the billions and billions of other solarsystems we now know are out there.
The circumstances fitting on the earth to maintain just such a delicate and meticulous balance of climate, atmosphere and solar distance is so particular on an astronomical level, the "crack" of life's survival is ridiculous.
There isn't anything particularly surprising about these seemingly special circumstances. For an intelligent species like us the exist, they must first be available. Without this prerequisite, no selfconsciousness would be around to wonder about it all. This is called the weak anthropic principle. It means that, without more data, we can not come to any reasonable conlusion at all about our circumstances being special or not, based on this experience alone.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by homunculus, posted 01-22-2009 1:57 AM homunculus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by homunculus, posted 01-24-2009 3:30 AM Annafan has not replied

  
Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 18 of 211 (495614)
01-23-2009 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by homunculus
01-23-2009 4:41 PM


Re: -Law of Providence-
homunculus writes:
Keep in mind that I am not asserting this as a variable. I claim that provision is required. Because in 6,000 years, the only thing that has been observed is life producing life (I.E. mating), sources for all happenings and effects being caused.
Spontaneous Generation has never happened. Look the universe over for life self generating. It never happens. Our universe does not suggest the supernatural, it guarantees it.
Right, so then we're done, I suppose? Anything you haven't seen happening with your own eyes is impossible.
Next!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by homunculus, posted 01-23-2009 4:41 PM homunculus has not replied

  
Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 106 of 211 (496100)
01-26-2009 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by homunculus
01-26-2009 1:56 AM


Re: Woah! Slow Down That Rush to Judgement!
homunculus writes:
(note: even if qualifying evidence was found to prove one of these theories, that would not necessarily mean it was due to lack of supernatural intercession. Just thought I would point that out.)
And here you have exactly the reason why science doesn't - and can't - consider supernatural explanations. They fit all and everything. And an answer to everything, is an answer to nothing. The only purpose of a supernatural explanation is to cover up an "I don't know", or at best an "I don't know yet"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by homunculus, posted 01-26-2009 1:56 AM homunculus has not replied

  
Annafan
Member (Idle past 4579 days)
Posts: 418
From: Belgium
Joined: 08-08-2005


Message 161 of 211 (496413)
01-28-2009 5:59 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by olivortex
01-28-2009 4:59 AM


Re: hi there.
Hi olivortex! Welcome to EvC, and I hope you will enjoy the stay.
BTW, do you by any chance live in a small village in Gallia, and have you been resisting the Romans? Your name, you see...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by olivortex, posted 01-28-2009 4:59 AM olivortex has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by olivortex, posted 01-28-2009 9:50 AM Annafan 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