How life could have started on Earth:

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Swing and a miss.

The article you cite is another one of the straw-graspings we've seen time after time: the supposed definitive proof of randomly-inspired biogenesis. Hogwash.

In these experiments, one of the controls is always the experimenter--- in this case, the chemists. For this particular set-up (get it? nothing random about a set-up, ...[text shortened]... egardless of the fact that it does nothing more than solidify the shakiness of the whole idea...

But of course if the stated results supported creationism, then it would have been brilliant science and recommendations gone straight to the Nobel prize committee, right?

Originally posted by sonhouse
But of course if the stated results supported creationism, then it would have been brilliant science and recommendations gone straight to the Nobel prize committee, right?

Here's the funny thing, sonhouse.
Both camps are fighting for the same thing: who gets to determine what people believe... at least, as it relates to origins.
That makes me wonder: who cares?
Think about it for a minute. Why should anyone care about how life started, how we got to where we are?
Why does the Bible start with origins?
How can it possibly matter how life was formed?

For the Christian, the Bible offers a vision of strength, of power. The God who creates is all powerful, puts the whole thing in motion and is capable of saving us from the black darkness of death when it's all over.

For the atheist, evolution offers a picture of complete and utter chance. This chance leads to further confluences of events, including all the vagaries of life, joys and sorrows and everything in between. And then it ends in the black darkness of death and is truly all over.

In the former, while the origins are comforting, they are not necessary for salvation.

In the latter, while the origins offer no comfort, they are absolutely critical for acceptance into the fold.

In both cases, the chance of knowing with even a remote level of certainty what actually happened is so close to zero as to render the exercise useless.

In both cases, even what we hold to be true has near to zero impact on anything we think or do otherwise in our daily lives. Sure, the Christian can argue how knowing God created the universe can offer a tremendous amount of succor for his daily applications and needs, just as the atheist can argue how the nature of chance which led to our existence is the justification for any number of life perspectives. But at the end of the day, we all still pretty much behave in a manner of baseline decency.

Kinda weird, if you think about it.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Here's the funny thing, sonhouse.
Both camps are fighting for the same thing: who gets to determine what people believe... at least, as it relates to origins.
That makes me wonder: who cares?
Think about it for a minute. Why should anyone care about how life started, how we got to where we are?
Why does the Bible start with origins?
How can it po ...[text shortened]... still pretty much behave in a manner of baseline decency.

Kinda weird, if you think about it.

Not weird. For one thing, you forget about human curiosity, how does it work, what is it made of, how long has it been here?

Another thing, you say 'for atheists', as if only atheists would be interested in evolution. You probably already know the Pope endorsed evolution so there are plenty of theists out there who buy into evolution. They also don't take literally the 6 day creation story either since it is obvious to anyone with half a brain the Earth is WAY older than that.

You don't have to be either a theist or atheist to have curiosity. That is a big part of what separates us from animals.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
How can it be a religious belief? It's making no claim to the supernatural or any deity.

It depends on the kind of process that is being preached.

If someone means by evolution animals change when they move into a new environment - that is observed and reasonable I think. No supernatural belief there.

If someone is means common descent of all living things, maybe there is some evidence for that which could be interpreted that way.

If you're talking about evolution as a mindless, unguided, goalless, random process, that went from immaterial substance essentially accidentally into the vast biosphere we see today - that's a religion. The god is probability. Maybe the god is Charles Darwin. And the supernatural event is absolutely no intelligent agency was involved.

That's a religion in my book. And it is designed not merely to make atheism fulfilled intellectually fulfilled. It is there to replace God. It is a "Without God" we trust religion.

That's how I see it. You're welcome to disagree.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Not weird. For one thing, you forget about human curiosity, how does it work, what is it made of, how long has it been here?

Another thing, you say 'for atheists', as if only atheists would be interested in evolution. You probably already know the Pope endorsed evolution so there are plenty of theists out there who buy into evolution. They also don't ta ...[text shortened]... her a theist or atheist to have curiosity. That is a big part of what separates us from animals.

Another thing, you say 'for atheists', as if only atheists would be interested in evolution.
I suppose I should/could have said "biogenesis" instead of "evolution."

They also don't take literally the 6 day creation story either since it is obvious to anyone with half a brain the Earth is WAY older than that.
The age of the planet has literally no bearing whatsoever on the validity of evolution.
Zero.

You don't have to be either a theist or atheist to have curiosity. That is a big part of what separates us from animals.
What a curious thing to assert.
Animals are curious about their surroundings, too.

But, since you brought it up...
What possible evolutionary advantage does curiosity bestow upon an agent?
What possible advantage do we gain in investigating an unknown--- and more specifically, this unknown, i.e., of our origins?
What gain is there in determining how it all began?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]Another thing, you say 'for atheists', as if only atheists would be interested in evolution.
I suppose I should/could have said "biogenesis" instead of "evolution."

They also don't take literally the 6 day creation story either since it is obvious to anyone with half a brain the Earth is WAY older than that.
The age of the planet has lit ...[text shortened]... this unknown, i.e., of our origins?
What gain is there in determining how it all began?[/b]

For one thing, curiosity can lead to racial survival, for instance, right now we are at the mercy of any large asteroid or comet that can strike Earth. We know all about the one 65 million years ago that, together with the volcanic activity maxed out att, did in the dinosaurs. That can happen again at most any time. So our curiosity about that can lead to ways to deal with the threat, either through detecting the things years in advance and sending some kind of spacecraft out to deflect it away from Earth or failing that, to at least get out of town, put colonists on Mars or the Moon or whatever, with enough stuff with them to survive on their own, at least for a few years while Earth settles down back to it's normal routine.

One a larger scale, to just get mankind off the planet and establish colonies on planets elsewhere in the galaxy as far from Earth as possible so a supernova nearby could off all life on Earth but mankind would go on and a large portion of Earths biosphere.

That is one evolutionary advantage to curiosity.

Originally posted by sonhouse
For one thing, curiosity can lead to racial survival, for instance, right now we are at the mercy of any large asteroid or comet that can strike Earth. We know all about the one 65 million years ago that, together with the volcanic activity maxed out att, did in the dinosaurs. That can happen again at most any time. So our curiosity about that can lead to w ...[text shortened]... on and a large portion of Earths biosphere.

That is one evolutionary advantage to curiosity.

That is one evolutionary advantage to curiosity.
For whom?

Originally posted by sonship
It depends on the kind of process that is being preached.

If someone means by evolution animals change when they move into a new environment - that is observed and reasonable I think. No supernatural belief there.

If someone is means common descent of all living things, maybe there is some evidence for that which could be interpreted that way.

If ...[text shortened]... It is a "Without God" we trust religion.

That's how I see it. You're welcome to disagree.

I do and will disagree. Respectfully of course. 🙂

I don't see how you cam term it a religion, unless of course you're using a non standard definition of the world religion.

Originally posted by sonhouse
For one thing, curiosity can lead to racial survival, for instance, right now we are at the mercy of any large asteroid or comet that can strike Earth. We know all about the one 65 million years ago that, together with the volcanic activity maxed out att, did in the dinosaurs. That can happen again at most any time. So our curiosity about that can lead to w ...[text shortened]... on and a large portion of Earths biosphere.

That is one evolutionary advantage to curiosity.

You are just so full of shyte.

The Instructor

Originally posted by sonship
I know that the chance of random events creating life from scratch and continuing until we see the present biosphere, probably is somebody's religious belief.

I am so tired of this back and forth, MY idea is correct, no MY idea is correct baloney. Both sides have to have it ALL or NOTHING.

I don't see how, in this present day and age, that humans are STILL having this argument.

I am a Christian. I am also a human. With eyes and a brain. Designed by God. It's clear to me that science has this right, with our technology at a point where we can pretty much figure out the outline of what happened here on this lonely ball of rock circling an insignificant star whizzing through a rather ordinary galaxy. God set the universe in motion with the Big Bang. Already, this is a "something for nothing" kind of bet that the atheists already accept. Yes, an omnipotent God set the Big Bang in motion in such a way as to bring the universe to this point at this very point in time. This one act of creation was enough. ALL the rest is just a continuation of physical laws which also happened to be created by God. Over time, our sun ignited from a ball of superdense gas and the rest of the local cosmic debris slowly accumulated into planets all following a well-known set of physical laws set forth by God at the outset. This particular ball of gas and debris also happened to contain an outer shell of debris ("dust", anyone?) which formed into comets harboring enough water to set the earth into motion as a planet with vast seas, and distributing the right elements on earth (most of which, heavier than iron, came from other stars in the local group going supernova) combined in just the right way to create life from the "dust" of the earth. The facts weigh heavily in favor of this being the way things happened on this planet, just one out of possibly billions of similar planets in the universe capable of supporting life even now. Evolution is a thoroughly reasonable way of life progressing from one celled life to the acme of the evolutionary ladder, man himself. After all, there was plenty of time for this to happen. 4.5 billion years is a LONG time. Why do all you Christians out there refuse to believe that God is omnipotent enough to create in this fashion? Yes, I believe that evolution was directed by God to raise humans from the "dust" of the earth, as mentioned in Genesis. What hubris you people have, to assume that we, the epitome of life on this planet, and the only species, according to some of you, to have been gifted with souls, could only be "poofed" into existence by a supposedly omnipotent being waving his hands like some Jedi mind trick? Were we some celestial kid's science project? Is that why it all had to be done "today", "right this minute"? The physical laws which dictate the shape of the universe also dictate that it all had to come together precisely right in order to get to this end result. How ELSE could it have happened if it wasn't for the hand of God driving evolution to this intended end? And yes, it took a LONG time. If it was a "wham, bam, thank you ma'am" type of creation, there would be endless evidence of this. Time was necessary to remove some of the fingerprints of God and to preserve the evidence trail of natural processes, just so that there COULD be an argument that "there is no god", and that it all happened without His intervention. Because man is required to believe through faith, not proof.

So atheists can believe that these events were all random, and believers can believe that they were directed by God. We were given free will in order to make this choice. But for it to be a fair choice, both sides must be possible, given what we can see with our eyes and imagine with our brains. Eyes and brains given to us through evolution, designed and directed by God. It is such a simple concept that I do not see why there is still any argument over this.

You know, except for man's vanity, insisting that he's always right, no matter what.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I am so tired of this back and forth, MY idea is correct, no MY idea is correct baloney. Both sides have to have it ALL or NOTHING.

I don't see how, in this present day and age, that humans are STILL having this argument.

I am a Christian. I am also a human. With eyes and a brain. Designed by God. It's clear to me that science has this right, wit ...[text shortened]... er this.

You know, except for man's vanity, insisting that he's always right, no matter what.

Do you believe there was a worldwide flood?

The Instructor

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]That is one evolutionary advantage to curiosity.
For whom?[/b]

You didn't get the part where I said for the continuance of the human race and maybe its biosphere too? On another planet. Of course all that is science fiction right now but in 300 years, assuming we survive the next 300 years as a scientific civilization, it will probably be another story, with colonies on several nearby stars. Just getting 10 or 20 ly away is not far enough away since anything within 5000 odd ly from a supernova and we are history including any colonies on Alpha Centauri or whatever. We need to be 5000 ly away from Earth, preferably away from the direction of known possible supernovae. That would have to await the development of faster than light drives or wormholes though. But that is the general idea to keep mankind going no matter what happens to Earth.

Originally posted by RJHinds
You are just so full of shyte.

The Instructor

So you don't believe there were giant impacts on Earth from asteroids or comets? You maybe forgot about Tunguska? Or the Barringer Crater in Arizona? Or the giant one in Yucatan that has proved to have a diameter of 180 miles or more? You figure those impacts are just a figment of our imagination?

Originally posted by RJHinds
Do you believe there was a worldwide flood?

The Instructor

I'm still out on this one.

One thing I do believe is that Moses thought there was. Whether he got this story from the Sumerians or not is probably a bigger question.

Originally posted by sonhouse
So you don't believe there were giant impacts on Earth from asteroids or comets? You maybe forgot about Tunguska? Or the Barringer Crater in Arizona? Or the giant one in Yucatan that has proved to have a diameter of 180 miles or more? You figure those impacts are just a figment of our imagination?

I must admit that you atheists do have vivid imaginations, like fish changing into amphibians and reptiles and mammals and such.

The Instructor