The impression I get is that most - if not all - of SetiAlpha's knowledge of biology and evolution comes from preachers and/or Creationist publications.?? Cells have more than carbon in them. You know that, right?
The impression I get is that most - if not all - of SetiAlpha's knowledge of biology and evolution comes from preachers and/or Creationist publications.?? Cells have more than carbon in them. You know that, right?
Beliefs, yes. Faith, I don't think so. What are you referring to?
The impression I get is that most - if not all - of SetiAlpha's knowledge of biology and evolution comes from preachers and/or Creationist publications.
You have faith that natural processes can create life from non-life, without sufficient evidence to prove it.
I will ask you again, please show me the evidence that proves it can be done.
The impression I get is that most - if not all - of SetiAlpha's knowledge of biology and evolution comes from preachers and/or Creationist publications.
How do you decide that the evidence is "not sufficient"?You have faith that natural processes can create life from non-life, without sufficient evidence to prove it.
And again with the semantics.Again, no evidence provided.
I ask you again, please provide sufficient evidence for your faith position.
I'm not the one who is asserting the necessity of an unevidenced supernatural being. That would be you, pretending to know things you don't know.
What's your creation story? you at least believe something created us, so you know it is a fact.The impression I get is that most - if not all - of SetiAlpha's knowledge of biology and evolution comes from preachers and/or Creationist publications.
Heads up, massive Evolution vs Creation thread to get your hooks in! Not that old.Again, no evidence provided.
I ask you again, please provide sufficient evidence for your faith position.
The impression I get is that most - if not all - of SetiAlpha's knowledge of biology and evolution comes from preachers and/or Creationist publications.
Specifically?
No. That's not a matter of faith.You have faith that natural processes can create life from non-life, without sufficient evidence to prove it.
I don't have any evidence that proves that abiogenesis can be done, obviously. All I have is all the suggestive evidence from science that points to that obvious conclusion. But I have never claimed to have the Answer. That's your claim, not mine.I will ask you again, please show me the evidence that proves it can be done.
Specifically?
Fifty eight minutes is not specific...Dr. Tour has given many lectures regarding the subject of Abiogenesis, here is just one of them, for your review.
SetiAlpha6:
No. That's not a matter of faith.
We have been talking about two possibilities here: 1. Life came from non-life through purely natural processes, without the intervention of a deity, and 2. Life was created in a special act of intentional Creation by the God of Abraham (or similar supernatural being).
Considering all the possibilities, what are we to do when it comes to expressing a belief about the origin of life? If, like me, you follow the evidence, then we find that there is a lot of evidence for the natural evolution of complex life from simpler forms, as well as a lot of evidence for purely chemical processes being able to create the precursors to life. It seems like a small step would be necessary to plug the gap in exactly how life got going from the chemicals. Does that mean I believe in natural abiogenesis? Here's what I believe: I believe it is very likely to be the correct explanation, and that's all I can say. I do not claim to know that life arose entirely naturally, but nor am I aware of any substantive evidence that would suggest that it did not do that.
But I should also say you don't get to have your God explanation by default. Even if it were to turn out that purely natural processes can't do the job of creating life,
that doesn't mean your God did it. Maybe it was the teenaged hacker. Maybe it was a friendly ghost. Maybe it was a supernatural accident caused by Hell breaking open for a moment. Or whatever. Point is: we'd need evidence of whatever it is you decide did it. You don't get it by default.
If you wanted to summarise my position, it would be fair to say that I would be surprised if it turns out that life doesn't have a natural origin, but I keep an open mind about that and I'm always open to hearing new evidence that might show that my position is untenable.
Faith doesn't come into this for me. Faith is what a person believes in spite of the lack of evidence. Faith is pretending to know stuff you don't know. I don't pretend to know that life arose naturally; I acknowledge that assumption is unproven so far. Therefore, faith is not an issue for me.
Contrast your own position. First, you set up a false dichotomy: either it was natural or else your God did it. Next, you decide, for no defensible reason, that the natural option is impossible, and therefore your God wins by default. Although, having said that, I don't think this is really how you reached your belief at all. I think the causation went the other way for you: first you believed in your supernatural God, then you believed that God was the Creator, and then you started looking around for reasons to dismiss things like evolution and to prop up your faith-based position.
You have not, as yet, suggested any positive evidence for the creation of life by your Creator God. But nevertheless, you believe that God Did It regardless of the paucity of evidence in support of your stance. That's the very definition of faith: believing without evidence. Moreover, you go further, and believe certain things about biology that are false even in the face of evidence to the contrary. And that is a real giveaway. You're unwilling to give up on your faith even when there's contradictory evidence.
I don't have any evidence that proves that abiogenesis can be done, obviously. All I have is all the suggestive evidence from science that points to that obvious conclusion. But I have never claimed to have the Answer. That's your claim, not mine.
So right back at you. I ask you to please show me the evidence that proves that your God created life in a special act of Creation. If you can.
Failing that, you should take your own advice and please stop pushing your personal belief system onto others.
Do you believe that Nothing created Everything?
If you do, please prove it.
I disagree.
Your view seems to run directly counter to the evidence we do have, which makes your view, faith in-spite of the evidence, at least in my eyes.
If I follow the current state of scientific research and accept it regarding the origin of life, then it is completely logical for me to conclude that Intelligent Design was needed. Life has never been shown to be possible without it. Never once! In no experiment!
Every scientific experiment done so far, was done by, hopefully, an intelligent designer.
It is the most logical position for me to take, based on real evidence and experimentation from decades of research.
Much more logical than thinking that a rock could do any of these experiments, or could ever do them, outside of the most sophisticated lab environments we can build.
That is where we actually are today. That is what the evidence actually points to right now. That natural processes can’t do the job of creating life. Every attempt has failed to create life from natural processes.
Fair!
Great!
Are you able to consider the thoughts and lectures of James Tour, without letting your Christophobia stop you from thinking?
I think you only have a faith position, which runs counter to basic logic, and runs counter even to the existing scientific evidence we do have. You only have a hopeful hypothesis, without the needed evidence to back it up.
Wrong.
We disagree on this,
I see no contradictory evidence.
Current scientific research already indicates Intelligent Design is needed.
Every experiment ever done in the field has required it, without exception.
So far, Science has shown the need for an Intelligent Designer of some kind. Please consider the statements of James Tour as my evidence.
If you can disrespect and abuse people for their faith positions, I can certainly challenge your, faith in-spite of the evidence positions, as long as I do it in a loving manner.
At least that is what I hope to do.
SetiAlpha6:
... Perhaps we all live in a simulation and life was just coded into existence by the equivalent of a teenaged hacker.