Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As I've repeatedly said--we all agree that it exists. I'm asking you how you can account for it other than by "science-of-the-gaps". How did it begin? I think it was created, as would be logical, since we know that it couldn't have begun on its own.
Of course, not. But then, this isn't relevant since the ongoing nature of it is irrelevant to how it all started. Please don't change the subject. We're talking about origins here...not the ongoing existence.
So from your quest for "origin of life" to "life exists" we're now onto "science of the gaps". It doesn't surprise me that you would continue to complain about not getting an answer... because you keep moving your goal post since there is little else you could do.
You think it was created. I think it was created. But that doesn't mean we're on the same page on this idea of "creation". My idea is based on evidence that life is temporary. It doesn't exist in vacuum and requires some ingredients for its existence, and then some we're not yet aware of. What is your take along the lines? Is life something pulled out of thin air? That it exists in vacuum (since you're completely opposed to the idea of any chemical reaction at work)?
Of course not? It is very much relevant if you must cling on to a belief that it is perpetual and doesn't require a set of reactions for its creation, sustenance and dissipation. Critical thinking... where is it?
Quote:
I'm still waiting for you to give me an actual answer of how life began. As demonstrated, you guys are great at changing the subject and tossing out insults, but you're short on actual answers.
And how many times do I need to repeat? It is your turn to demonstrate your "critical thinking" abilities... after all, you have one more degree than I.
It is no act, I find the breadth and depth of your ignorance truly shocking, even more so because it appears to be willful and deliberate ignorance.
Quote:
We've all seen the hoaxes of "missing links".
This is a nonsensical statement that, once again, demonstrates your near total ignorance of science. All forms are transitional - that means that every generation of every species that ever existed is a "missing link."
Yes, some people have perpetuated fraud in science, and they were busted on it - by other scientists. Nothing you say here is a valid or legitimate criticism of legitimate biology.
Quote:
But for the sake of moving this along, there are plenty of threads on evolution we can take it to...let's talk origin of life.
Sure, but evolution is a FACT that is explained by a THEORY. No matter how many times this is explained to you, no matter how many times the evidence is shown to you, you reject it. It has nothing to do with the validity of the science, but it has everything to do with your internal psychologic state/
As for abiogenesis, it's still just a hypothesis- but it's a hypothesis with a lot of evidence to support it. Whereas Creationism has no such evidence, and indeed cannot even be tested.
Quote:
No....we don't know it's possible.
That depends on what you mean by "possible." We know the right ingredients and conditions were present, plus ample time for it to happen - perhaps even more than once.
Quote:
Scientists think it's possible because they have run experiments that kind of hint at it.
See, here's the problem. YOU DON'T KNOW. You don't know the science, so this statement, from you, is pretty meaningless. We've done a lot since the Miller-Urey experiment, and they do more than just "kind of hint at it."
But then again, how would you know?
Quote:
The only other alternative is to believe in a creator. They aren't willing to do that.
I find it amusing that you regard yourself as being so logical, and yet you make statements like this that are absolutely ILLOGICAL. There are other alternatives to abiogenesis that do not include a Creator. A Creator remains one of the alternatives, but not the only one. It's also the one with the least evidentiary support - that is to say, none.
Your speculation on what scientists are willing to do or not is silly. They want to find out the truth, even if that truth does not mesh with their personal beliefs.
This is the difference between you and them, and why they win these arguments, every time. You start from a position of intellectual dishonesty.
Quote:
Doesn't answer the question--only relocates the origin of life.
This is precisely the arrogant attitude I've referred to, and the complete lack of critical thinking.
You are the one exhibiting a lack of critical thinking here, not to mention a lack of understanding of how logic works. That is why you are being yelled at: because you are so amazingly, stupendously, embarrassingly wrong - all while you trumpet your so-called intellect before people that see right through you and your ludicrous arguments.
If you had more sense, you really would be embarrassed.
Quote:
When I bring up the failures of abiogenesis to be proven...you point to panspermia...as if life originating on another planet somehow makes you a genius.
Huh? I merely mentioned it as another possibility of the origin of life on Earth. Personally I consider it a remote one.
But this isn't about that, it's really about your intellectual insecurity, obviously.
Quote:
I'm still waiting for you to bring your answer.
The answer is that you need a basic high school biology education untainted by your inner religious override procedure.
No, it does not. It is merely an opinion based on the scribblings of Bronze age Hebrew tribesmen. Those writings have a value all on their own for a lot of reasons, but they are not a scientific treatise.
Your OPINIONS cannot be tested, and are therefore scientifically worthless.
Quote:
Your's does not. I'm still waiting for you to give me a reasonable answer--other than that you just believe in science-of-the-gaps.
You have been given a reasonable answer, but you do not operate on reason, so you do not see it for what it is.
Quote:
What causes life to begin? How does it begin? We can analyze the parts--but I'm curious if you can tell me how it all started.
The honest answer already given to you is that we don't know exactly, but we are working on it. Now here is where your logic fails: you think that because this is true, that YOUR opinion is automatically validated.
It isn't. That's a major logical fail right there, from someone who touts themselves to be a practitioner of logic.
You guys are really good at just ignoring the question. If you don't have an answer, that's fine...just admit it. You have no clue how life began, and don't really care--you are just unwilling to be open-minded enough and rational enough to consider that you don't know.
You guys are really good at just ignoring the question. If you don't have an answer, that's fine...just admit it. You have no clue how life began, and don't really care--you are just unwilling to be open-minded enough and rational enough to consider that you don't know.
I am very sorry that you do not realize how much of a fool you have made of yourself in this thread.
No, it does not. It is merely an opinion based on the scribblings of Bronze age Hebrew tribesmen. Those writings have a value all on their own for a lot of reasons, but they are not a scientific treatise.
Your OPINIONS cannot be tested, and are therefore scientifically worthless.
We know that life could not have begun without being caused. At least that is, if you actually care to use the scientific method of analyzing it.
Quote:
You have been given a reasonable answer, but you do not operate on reason, so you do not see it for what it is.
The honest answer already given to you is that we don't know exactly, but we are working on it. Now here is where your logic fails: you think that because this is true, that YOUR opinion is automatically validated.
It isn't. That's a major logical fail right there, from someone who touts themselves to be a practitioner of logic.
As I said...you really don't have a clue, but your'e just not willing to accept the logical answer that there was a creator, so you just call everyone that disagrees with you "stupid" and pretend you are reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strel
I am very sorry that you do not realize how much of a fool you have made of yourself in this thread.
says the guy that thinks life just magically appeared out of a few chemicals combining (but we can't duplicate it) .... or that it floated down out of space on a meteor....nevermind the implications of it beginning elsewhere in the universe.
You guys are really good at just ignoring the question. If you don't have an answer, that's fine...just admit it. You have no clue how life began, and don't really care--you are just unwilling to be open-minded enough and rational enough to consider that you don't know.
Ahem... since you've chosen the typical run-around with answers provided, why don't you provide your answer to the question? I promise to follow it up with mine (again).
Ahem... since you've chosen the typical run-around with answers provided, why don't you provide your answer to the question? I promise to follow it up with mine (again).
I have repeatedly said that life was created by a Creator.
I have repeatedly said that life was created by a Creator.
And this is your idea of "critical thinking". Got it.
So, did the Creator pull life out of thin air?
Quote:
Your turn.
Life got created out of elements, which it needs to exist. Or, can life survive without these elements (many of which we know about)?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
