Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
451 online now:
Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (1 member, 450 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,046 Year: 5,158/6,534 Month: 1/577 Week: 69/135 Day: 1/8 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Transition from chemistry to biology
Peepul
Member (Idle past 4292 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 389 of 415 (514825)
07-13-2009 7:25 AM
Reply to: Message 388 by greentwiga
07-11-2009 9:09 PM


Re: Eternal Life
Currently, though, it is a faith step to say that the long self replicating molecule formed spontaneously, just as it is a faith step to say that God guided the formation of the combination that became self replicating. Until we have proof, either statement is a faith step (or an unproven hypothesis, if you will.)

There's no faith involved in the scientific process. You're talking about our best theory of the origin of replication, which may or may not be true. We are trying to find out. Some individuals may 'believe' it to be true but in the end the beliefs of individual scientists do not matter to the progress of science, except to the extent that they lead people to study particular areas and question particular conclusions.

To believe that God did it, on the other hand, you do have to have faith - in the existence and nature of God.

So I contend these two positions are different.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 388 by greentwiga, posted 07-11-2009 9:09 PM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 390 by greentwiga, posted 07-13-2009 9:37 AM Peepul has replied

Peepul
Member (Idle past 4292 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 391 of 415 (514839)
07-13-2009 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 390 by greentwiga
07-13-2009 9:37 AM


e: Eternal Life
you've just re-iterated your argument without commenting on mine!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 390 by greentwiga, posted 07-13-2009 9:37 AM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 392 by greentwiga, posted 07-13-2009 9:45 AM Peepul has taken no action

Peepul
Member (Idle past 4292 days)
Posts: 206
Joined: 03-13-2009


Message 404 of 415 (514935)
07-14-2009 7:48 AM
Reply to: Message 397 by greentwiga
07-13-2009 6:45 PM


Re: hypothesis
Many people might really be saying, "It could have happened here or at tide pools, but I don't know." Once you decide that it must be one way, you are saying, "I believe it happened this way." Saying, it could not have happened with God's guidance, is such a belief statement.

This is confused thinking. The level of belief in science is not the same as religious belief. Once there is a favoured theory, it does not mean that science believes it to be true in the same sense as a religious tenet. Conclusions are tentative and open to revision in the light of further evidence.

Science cannot say it could not have happened with God's guidance, and it does not claim that. All it can say is that there is no objective evidence of God's existence or involvement in this process.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 397 by greentwiga, posted 07-13-2009 6:45 PM greentwiga has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 406 by greentwiga, posted 07-14-2009 1:08 PM Peepul has taken no action

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022