|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Evolution is not Abiogenesis | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
marc9000 writes:
And why are you unable to comprehend simple English?
TAQ WAS THE ONE WHO DECLARED IT TO BE ABOUT ABIOGENESIS. Why didn’t you correct him? Why did he even post that? Why was he dishonest about it being about abiogensis? Why are you trying to cover for him? taq writes:
This is Taq showing you what the consequences of merging abiogenesis and evolution are. Fine then. Let's blend them into the same thing. Abiogenesis and evolution are now the same. I don't think you will like this result, however. So have we observed abiogenesis? Yep, sure have. Here is a great paper demonstrating abiogenesis:He is not saying that they should be merged; he is merely describing what would happen if they were. This is not an advanced conversational technique.But for some reason it goes completely over your head. No wonder you are having trouble understanding the Theory of Evolution - it is written in English. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
RAZD writes:
Surely chemical processes are a subset of biological processes? Abiogenesis involves chemical processes, evolution does not. Evolution involves biological processes, abiogenesis does not. They cannot be the same thing nor can one be a subset of the other. Wiki: A biological process is a process of a living organism. Biological processes are made up of any number of chemical reactions or other events that results in a transformation.Wiki: A chemical process is a method or means of somehow changing one or more chemicals or chemical compounds. Such a chemical process can occur by itself or be caused by somebody. Such a chemical process commonly involves a chemical reaction of some sort. Although I agree that abiogenesis and evolution are different areas of research, I do not see how your statement supports that. Abiogenesis is "No life" to "Life".Evolution is "Life" to "Different life". This seems to me to be a clear enough difference for all but the most delusional. If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
RAZD writes:
I agree. Panda writes:
There are clearly processes in abiogenesis that are different from processes in evolution, for instance population dynamics is not a chemical process, it is a biological process and it affects evolution. Surely chemical processes are a subset of biological processes?But that does not negate the fact that chemical processes are a subset of biological processes. RAZD writes:
I agree. But that is not what you originally said. That there may be some processes in common does not rule out processes that are exclusive to the two sciences. "Abiogenesis involves chemical processes, evolution does not."This is simply incorrect. Evolution does involve chemical processes. Your explanation of "the essential difference between abiogenesis and evolution" is faulty.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
RAZD writes:
Would you not agree that chemical processes are a subset of biological processes?
Panda writes:
Would you not agree that there is a majority of chemical processes that are not biological and have nothing to do with biology? But that does not negate the fact that chemical processes are a subset of biological processes. RAZD writes:
You would rather be wrong than be corrected? You get the nit-picker award, happy?Or are you just upset at having to hand over your nit-picker award? If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
NoNukes writes:
It is a shame that RAZD was too busy sulking to actually address my question (even though I asked it twice). In order to answer no to your question, I would only need to identify a single chemical process that was not also a biological process. I chose for my example of a chemical process that is not also a biological process the formation of xenon dioxide by way of hydrolysis of xenon tetrafluoride.I think I agree with your answer. What is your opinion of RAZD's claim that "Abiogenesis involves chemical processes, evolution does not."?If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
anglagard writes:
Yes. NoNukes successfully explained my mistake in Message 221. I think you may want to rephrase this response. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
NoNukes writes:
That is what I thought too. Evolution includes process that result in changes in DNA molecules. How is that not chemistry? Just checkin'.Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
Portillo writes:
What do you think of these quotes by Theodosius Dobzhansky?
What do you guys and girls think of this quote by Theodosius Dobzhansky? quote: quote: quote: Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 4027 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined:
|
AM writes:
Nothing in your post is correct - it is all wrong. What is pre-life, pray? The concept sounds like pre-virginity to the feline.Transition from non-life to pre-life sounds like losing pre-virginity. Replication errors in pre-life? What's that? The concept is memory error which is not just forgetfulness but a substitution of the forgotten with fiction some of which fits changing reality. While both to forget something or to tell fibs in place of the forgotten, something has to be in memory already. Memory seems to be the essence of being alive. No difference between the virus and the human. Nothing in your post is true - it is all false. Nothing in your post makes sense - it is all nonsense. I think that just about sums it up. "There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025