The Beginning of Life (hell, genesis, atheist, quote)
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.
Mystic your post reeks of ignorance, misrepresentation and bias. Stop trying to make Arach look like a fool that he really is not. Sure Abiogenesis is at best with some circumstantial evidence and theories. But deprecatory sneering is not disproof.
Stop talking about me and address the post. There was no sneering or deprecation involved. Given YOUR belief in euphemisms, why isn't Life an "emergent" property of chemistry??? Answer: Because it is an observation only and explains nothing!
Arach, as a chemist and atheist and believer in euphemisms, your question can be answered very easily - life is an "emergent" property of chemistry. Now, do you see why I balk at crediting such euphemistic nonsense as "explanations?"
that is true, life is "emergent". You and I look emergence differently. I see it as just another level of complexity that produced an unexpected trait, better stated and more interactions possible with its surroundings. That's all it is to me. its not magic at all.
But you totally understand where I am coming with that, it is what it is.
but more importantly, we need a mechanism and repeatable prediction. Once we have those; how you feel or I feel about emergence is irrelevant.
so we are left with, dare I say, our beloved qed. With me using the interactions of less complex fields to form more complex interactions between fields or your aware field that is, as of now, still unknown.
that is our list ...
the interactions of less complex fields to form more complex interactions between fields (life on earth)
or
your aware field that is, as of now, still unknown. (universe of life itself)
But they don't make money with guys like me and you debating do they.
Stop talking about me and address the post. There was no sneering or deprecation involved. Given YOUR belief in euphemisms, why isn't Life an "emergent" property of chemistry??? Answer: Because it is an observation only and explains nothing!
All right. You deprecate the idea of biochemicals becoming replicating DNA through a natural process as 'chemistry' and dismiss 'emergence' without any good reason suggesting that Arach (and anyone else) 'sees' it the way you do.
That miserable effort merits the terms I used.
Arach's response seems to show that he isn't fooled. Now I have to ask, are you taking a Creationist stance, not just of saying a Cosmic Mind was behind the process of Life, but of saying that it had to do it because it could not naturally 'emerge'? It seems to me that Arach is not so eager to dismiss the hypothesis if natural emergence of 'life' (of which I'd say that replication of the precursor of DNA was the start) as are you.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-04-2020 at 10:04 PM..
Perhaps we are looking at things from the inside out and we will never know.
A:"We emerged from chemicals!"
B:"But what created the chemicals and why?"
A:"It can all be explained naturally. Quit acting as though you need some type God for any answers."
B:"I didn't mean to imply I needed any Gods I just do not rule out what I can not prove."
A:"I can't prove Big Foot doesn't exist but I am sure he doesn't (despite various historical reports).
It's always best to wait for scientist to tell us what to do next."
Arach's response seems to show that he isn't fooled. Now I have to ask, are you taking a Creationist stance, not just of saying a Cosmic Mind was behind the process of Life, but of saying that it had to do it because it could not naturally 'emerge'? It seems to me that Arach is not so eager to dismiss the hypothesis if natural emergence of 'life' (of which I'd say that replication of the precursor of DNA was the start) as are you.
I am NOT and never have taken a "Creationist" stance so stop trying to denigrate my views by association with them. I take an Existentialist stance. The EXISTENCE of God is why our Reality exists. Our Reality undeniably exists. There is no need to prove it exists. You have to justify why such an ineffable Reality can NOT be God other than your preferred belief in NO God. Your conditioned response to such terms as nature, natural, whatever are NOT answers to WHAT our ineffable Reality IS.
I am NOT and never have taken a "Creationist" stance so stop trying to denigrate my views by association with them. I take an Existentialist stance. The EXISTENCE of God is why our Reality exists. Our Reality undeniably exists. There is no need to prove it exists. You have to justify why such an ineffable Reality can NOT be God other than your preferred belief in NO God. Your conditioned response to such terms as nature, natural, whatever are NOT answers to WHAT our ineffable Reality IS.
We are on topic so I can repeat that I am asking whether you are arguing that abiogenesis (the proposed mechanisms) are probable, with a god -influence behind them, or whether you are arguing that abiogenesis cannot happen without God's intervention (which is the I/C claim - or ought to be)
You believe one or the other, and I am asking, not telling. So I suggest that you answer the question and stop smokescreening, because I don't believe even you can genuinely misunderstand my post so utterly.
We are on topic so I can repeat that I am asking whether you are arguing that abiogenesis (the proposed mechanisms) are probable, with a god -influence behind them, or whether you are arguing that abiogenesis cannot happen without God's intervention (which is the I/C claim - or ought to be)
You believe one or the other, and I am asking, not telling. So I suggest that you answer the question and stop smokescreening, because I don't believe even you can genuinely misunderstand my post so utterly.
You are asking an absurd question since life exists. There can be no question about whether or not it is probable. Obviously, since life exists we may eventually discover HOW it exists (the proposed mechanisms) but that will not tell us WHY it exists. THAT is the question answered by the EXISTENCE of a living God that we call our Reality, NOT your "who knows what."
That is evasion of the question I asked. I am asking you to answer it. Do you think abiogenesis could happen without a god helping it along? I can quote your post that led to this question (1) if you like. More evasion will be held up to your increased discredit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gabfest
Perhaps we are looking at things from the inside out and we will never know.
A:"We emerged from chemicals!"
B:"But what created the chemicals and why?"
A:"It can all be explained naturally. Quit acting as though you need some type God for any answers."
B:"I didn't mean to imply I needed any Gods I just do not rule out what I can not prove."
A:"I can't prove Big Foot doesn't exist but I am sure he doesn't (despite various historical reports).
It's always best to wait for scientist to tell us what to do next."
That's a mess of misrepresentation, half -truths, bias and illogic.
You accept that or you want me to explain exactly how?
(1) in fact #1181, by sneeringly referring to life as an emergent property of 'chemistry' you implied that you didn't think this could happen without a god doing it. That's I/C, which is a creationist argument. Now, are you tired of being shown to be either dishonest or unable to keep track of your own argument?
That is evasion of the question I asked. I am asking you to answer it. Do you think abiogenesis could happen without a god helping it along? I can quote your post that led to this question if you like. More evasion will be held up to your increased discredit.
Helping it along is nonsense! BEING Life itself is the answer, Arq. God IS life and without God, there would be no life.
Helping it along is nonsense! BEING Life itself is the answer, Arq. God IS life and without God, there would be no life.
Toying with words, evasion and still not addressing the question is not clever Mystic, it just makes you look dishonest. Address the question and don't go off on an irrelevant preachfest of your personal doctrines.
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.
