I support the position that we do not know how life originated. I will use a single argument to buttress my position.
Science has postulated that life began with a single cell.
A living cell has been shown to be extremely complex, with all kinds of interior mechanisms needed for it to function, including DNA and RNA to manufacture amino acid chains and other large complex functional structures. Many of the structures must be completed inside time limits of a few hours, and not millions of years too, or else they refuse to form properly. Protein folds, are a good example of this.
Science has absolutely no clue as to how to construct such a cell and to ensure its functionality. Thus they have no way to state that they have conquered the origin of life.
The idea that in the early times, a primal soup had all the chemicals needed to make life once struck by lightning, the Miller/Uray Experiment, has been proven to be false.
I thank Dr. James Tour for his insight into the origins of life.
manning5me wrote:
I support the position that we do not know how life originated. I will use a single argument to buttress my position.
Science has postulated that life began with a single cell.
A living cell has been shown to be extremely complex, with all kinds of interior mechanisms needed for it to function, including DNA and RNA to manufacture amino acid chains and other large complex functional structures. Many of the structures must be completed inside time limits of a few hours, and not millions of years too, or else they refuse to form properly. Protein folds, are a good example of this.
Science has absolutely no clue as to how to construct such a cell and to ensure its functionality. Thus they have no way to state that they have conquered the origin of life.
The idea that in the early times, a primal soup had all the chemicals needed to make life once struck by lightning, the Miller/Uray Experiment, has been proven to be false.
I thank Dr. James Tour for his insight into the origins of life.
I support the position that we do not know how lif... (
show quote)
Does that make us scientific agnostics? LOL!
There is actually not enough empirical evidence to support ANY theory of the origin of life, or the universe in general. EVERY theory requires faith. My belief in God in rooted in faith from His impact on my life and my heart....rock solid evidence, at least to me. My belief in His Creation follows from my belief in HIM.
One difference between Christianity and Islam is that God's Christians are willing to die for their beliefs, but are instructed not to kill for them.
But a significant percentage of Muslims are instructed, willing, even eager, to kill anyone who will not commit to their faith.
RandyBrian wrote:
Does that make us scientific agnostics? LOL!
There is actually not enough empirical evidence to support ANY theory of the origin of life, or the universe in general. EVERY theory requires faith. My belief in God in rooted in faith from His impact on my life and my heart....rock solid evidence, at least to me. My belief in His Creation follows from my belief in HIM.
One difference between Christianity and Islam is that God's Christians are willing to die for their beliefs, but are instructed not to kill for them.
But a significant percentage of Muslims are instructed, willing, even eager, to kill anyone who will not commit to their faith.
Does that make us scientific agnostics? LOL! br... (
show quote)
====================
My idea was to use economy of argumentation, but there are other threads to the argument, I think. One suffces!
RandyBrian wrote:
Does that make us scientific agnostics? LOL!
There is actually not enough empirical evidence to support ANY theory of the origin of life, or the universe in general. EVERY theory requires faith. My belief in God in rooted in faith from His impact on my life and my heart....rock solid evidence, at least to me. My belief in His Creation follows from my belief in HIM.
One difference between Christianity and Islam is that God's Christians are willing to die for their beliefs, but are instructed not to kill for them.
But a significant percentage of Muslims are instructed, willing, even eager, to kill anyone who will not commit to their faith.
Does that make us scientific agnostics? LOL! br... (
show quote)
Incorrect...
Proven theories do not require faith...
manning5me wrote:
I support the position that we do not know how life originated. I will use a single argument to buttress my position.
Science has postulated that life began with a single cell.
A living cell has been shown to be extremely complex, with all kinds of interior mechanisms needed for it to function, including DNA and RNA to manufacture amino acid chains and other large complex functional structures. Many of the structures must be completed inside time limits of a few hours, and not millions of years too, or else they refuse to form properly. Protein folds, are a good example of this.
Science has absolutely no clue as to how to construct such a cell and to ensure its functionality. Thus they have no way to state that they have conquered the origin of life.
The idea that in the early times, a primal soup had all the chemicals needed to make life once struck by lightning, the Miller/Uray Experiment, has been proven to be false.
I thank Dr. James Tour for his insight into the origins of life.
I support the position that we do not know how lif... (
show quote)
Has any scientist stated that they have conquered the origins of life???
I wasn't aware that the Miller-Uray experiment had been proven false... In what way???
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Incorrect...
Proven theories do not require faith...
Agreed. Which theory of the origin of life has been proven?
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Has any scientist stated that they have conquered the origins of life???
I wasn't aware that the Miller-Uray experiment had been proven false... In what way???
====================
My reference for this is "The Return of the God Hypothesis" by Dr. Stephen c. Meyer. Meyer in this and several of his books has pointed out that the M/U experiment had two killing flaws: 1. Each stage of the process was set up by the people with new, clean vessels and new pure ingredients, which would have been impossible in primitive times; and, 2. the products in the form of amino acids were of the wrong hand, i.e. they were all 'left-handed' when they should be 'right-handed' (or vice versa, I forget which!) Thus, it was not successful.
RandyBrian wrote:
Agreed. Which theory of the origin of life has been proven?
None! Source: Dr. James Tour
RandyBrian wrote:
Agreed. Which theory of the origin of life has been proven?
None...
But how does that address your earlier statement??
manning5me wrote:
====================
My reference for this is "The Return of the God Hypothesis" by Dr. Stephen c. Meyer. Meyer in this and several of his books has pointed out that the M/U experiment had two killing flaws: 1. Each stage of the process was set up by the people with new, clean vessels and new pure ingredients, which would have been impossible in primitive times; and, 2. the products in the form of amino acids were of the wrong hand, i.e. they were all 'left-handed' when they should be 'right-handed' (or vice versa, I forget which!) Thus, it was not successful.
==================== br My reference for this is &... (
show quote)
I don't see how that was a failure...
He still proved that certain amino acids could be created...
The earth's history is of billions of years...
I thought you were perhaps referring to the glass factor..
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
None...
But how does that address your earlier statement??
Perhaps we are miscommunicating somewhere. My comment "EVERY theory requires faith" was made in direct reference to the origin of life question.
It was not intended to apply to all theories.
Does that help clear things up? I did not intend to be confusing, but perhaps I was.
RandyBrian wrote:
Perhaps we are miscommunicating somewhere. My comment "EVERY theory requires faith" was made in direct reference to the origin of life question.
It was not intended to apply to all theories.
Does that help clear things up? I did not intend to be confusing, but perhaps I was.
Very clear.. Thanks..
I agree...
Origin of life theories have yet to be proven.. Anyone claiming they are correct is operating on faith...
It's no different from religion..
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Very clear.. Thanks..
I agree...
Origin of life theories have yet to be proven.. Anyone claiming they are correct is operating on faith...
It's no different from religion..
Agreed.
How was your snow adventure with your daughter and students?
RandyBrian wrote:
Agreed.
How was your snow adventure with your daughter and students?
Most excellent
Although it turned into a sled day...Snow was too dry for building snowmen
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Most excellent
Although it turned into a sled day...Snow was too dry for building snowmen
That's great! We are currently suffering under 60 degree weather. Coat and gloves for me!
I really appreciate your sharing tidbits of your young lady. I have always loved all kids, but have a special affection for little girls. I raised three of them, and I am blessed because they are all healthy and happy. And I have three granddaughters, two of which I helped raise. The third is my granddaughter by marriage, and lives 200 miles away, so I don't see her as often. But she has given me my first great grandchild, a one year old girl named Lili. I will get to see her again at Christmas.
I also have three grandsons, ranging from 8 to 13.
CD, I am truly blessed! I hope you enjoy raising your girl as much as I did my brood!. It is a highly addicting hobby, LOL!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.