Evidence for evolution

Huh? Let's try a different tack. You probably weigh somewhere between 100 and 200 lbs, but when you were born, you only weighed between 6 and 10 lbs. So where did all that you come from?We're talking about more than chemicals dissolving into your bloodstream. We're talking about the fact that you - a living thing - are made out of things that, at one point, were not alive. The evidence that it did is the observation that it does.I don't understand your objections to that evidence.This message has been edited by crashfrog, 12-15-2004 12:06 AM

Well, life exists. And there is ample evidence that non-life was around before there was life.So life came from non-life. The issue is how that happened. It could have been through natural means. Or it could have been through some GOD turning directly turning dust (non-living matter) into living matter. Our it could have been through a GOD creating a universe where life developed from non-life.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You know, people on this forum are so biased. Have you ever thought about keeping an open mind? Everybody here on the evolution side seems to be so touchy. I ask simple questions and I am bombarded with hate messages. Oh, obviously I am a creationist or a "life-force" guy. Oh, obviously my questions are "loaded."I've been accused of all kinds of things that I never said or intended. Why shouldn't I question science? I question everything.I talk about the difficulty of the mentality evolving from physicality, and somebody accuses me of "denying reality." Excuse me?
Somebody else says I'm introducing the idea of the "numinous."All I said was I didn't understand it.Goodness gracious! Do other people have this problem?

I'm asking you if there is any empirical evidence that a piece of non-life turned into a piece of the first life on this earth.

Let me ask you this question. Suppose that there is no evidence we have right now that support the hypothesis that at some point in the history of Earth some inorganic matter combined and formed the first life on Earth, what conclusion can you (YOU) draw from this apparent lack of evidence?

I draw the conclusion that we don't know how life came from non-life or even if it did. For all we know, life on this earth may have come from some other life somewhere else. That seems more probable--a like thing coming from a like thing.What do you think?

That only moves the issue back one step. Where ever life came from it at some time came from non-life. Whether it was here, or some other world, or a planet far far away, life originated.However, as you have stated, that has nothing to do with evolution or the Theory of Evolution.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You didn't answer my question. How did life originate and what evidence do you have?

And by the way, there is always the possibility that life did not come from non-life.

But everyone has been answering your question. We do not KNOW how life originated. But it did come from non-life unless you can suggest some other source.And once again, that has NOTHING to do with the topic. Please try to stay on topic.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Well, it might have come from some life that was eternal.Why is that less likely than life coming from non-life?

Again, that simply pushes the issue back further.And this is off topic.I will not respond further on the origin of life in this thread.This message has been edited by jar, 12-15-2004 01:02 AM

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The problem with this is that we have absolutely no evidence of this eternal life... unless you can propose to us an experiment that could allow us to detect this eternal life.Added by edit.Ok, suppose we can detect this entity that is eternal, what then?This message has been edited by Lam, 12-15-2004 01:02 AM

---

Hate world.Revenge soon!

Hardly. It introduces a whole new idea.But anyway, I found out what I wanted to know. There is no evidence one way or the other than life came from non-life.Thanks.

As noted Lam, this has wandered off topic. Thanks.