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.
You're making no sense. That's an intellectual cop-out. You're doing the equivalent of believing in a god of the gaps...only from a biologists point of view.
You earlier agreed that there was indeed a time when there was no life at all. Did anything, in your opinion, exist before life finally emerged?
I mean what I said--you're avoiding the argument. You think creationists are idiots but you seem to think that believing in abiogenesis of the gaps is somehow reasonable. You have no other way to explain how life began...but you're too proud to admit it might have been a creator.
Logic dictates that "pride" be left aside, just the quest to analyze and observe. That doesn't mean, however, that one can't be emotional about and celebrate discoveries with pride.
Just so none of us avoids any argument, I'm trying to keep it simple, one step at a time. You're the one not liking the idea and want to keep parroting "science believes life came from life". How about agreeing on something we potentially could, that the carrier of life is made up of inorganic matter, a fundamental premise of abiogensis? Then we can dig further into life itself. Are you with me on that? Or do you have issues with that premise as well?
Logic dictates that "pride" be left aside, just the quest to analyze and observe. That doesn't mean, however, that one can't be emotional about and celebrate discoveries with pride.
Just so none of us avoids any argument, I'm trying to keep it simple, one step at a time. You're the one not liking the idea and want to keep parroting "science believes life came from life". How about agreeing on something we potentially could, that the carrier of life is made up of inorganic matter, a fundamental premise of abiogensis? Then we can dig further into life itself. Are you with me on that? Or do you have issues with that premise as well?
We are made up of inorganic matter? What do you mean by "carrier of life"?
We are made up of inorganic matter? What do you mean by "carrier of life"?
So we have settled the primary issue of the "carrier" being inorganic. And this is where abiogenesis begins. By "carrier" I implied a thing with life in it. Can life exist without a carrier (body)? If so, what evidence do you have of it?
No life existed. The question of a creator existing is not really relevant to abiogenesis discussions.
I didn't ask you if a creator existed. I asked if there was anything that pre-existed the emergence of life. Were there stars, galaxies, atoms, subatomic particles, gravity, etc., before life came on the scene? Or do you think life and the entire universe all popped into existence at the same time? So, yes, it is indeed very relevent to abiogenesis discussions.
I didn't ask you if a creator existed. I asked if there was anything that pre-existed the emergence of life. Were there stars, galaxies, atoms, subatomic particles, gravity, etc., before life came on the scene? Or do you think life and the entire universe all popped into existence at the same time? So, yes, it is indeed very relevent to abiogenesis discussions.
Nevermind the shortness or length of time frames. I take your reply to mean that you believe that before life emerged, the universe contained stars, galaxies, atoms, subatomic particles, fundamental forces, etc.
Do you also believe that the physical body of human beings are made of cells, which at much deeper scales are made of atoms?
Nevermind the shortness or length of time frames. I take your reply to mean that you believe that before life emerged, the universe contained stars, galaxies, atoms, subatomic particles, fundamental forces, etc.
Do you also believe that the physical body of human beings are made of cells, which at much deeper scales are made of atoms?
Thank you. Do you understand even though you are a human being (a form of life), that all the atoms in your body in and of themselves are not living things?
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.
How about agreeing on something we potentially could, that the carrier of life is made up of inorganic matter, a fundamental premise of abiogensis? Then we can dig further into life itself. Are you with me on that? Or do you have issues with that premise as well?
