abiogenesis and evolution

[Fineous_Reese]

Capital "E" Evolution has only to do with how species change? What then does Evolution say, if it can say anything, regarding how species got here in the first place?

 

[Brennan]

It doesn't.

Look up 'abiogenesis' for the stuff about the primordial ooze.

 

[Fineous_Reese]

It doesn't.

Look up 'abiogenesis' for the stuff about the primordial ooze.

interesting.

Look up "in the beginning was information" by werner gitt for starters on why 'abiogenesis' isn't feasible.

 

[Brennan]

If you know the difference between Evolution and Abiogenesis, why did you ask the question? If you appreciate that there is a difference and what it is, why not help to educate all those poor Creationists who think Evolution has anything to do with the creation of life?

Wiki on Werner Gitt:

In his book In the Beginning was Information.[2] ... he argues that information theory refutes evolution, though this has been rejected by the scientific community as pseudoscience, specifically pseudomathematics.

Nothing about Abiogenesis there...

 

[Fineous_Reese]

i asked because i sought an answer. evolution is moot without abiogenesis and abiogenesis doesn't happen.

 

[Brennan]

A fascinating conclusion.

Why is evolution 'moot' without Abiogenesis? As far as I am aware evolution requires nothing more than the existence of life. Abiogenesis OR a direct act of Creation both provide the existence of life. You may disagree with Abiogenesis but that does not give you a basis to disagree with evolution.

 

[Fineous_Reese]

A fascinating conclusion.

Why is evolution 'moot' without Abiogenesis? As far as I am aware evolution requires nothing more than the existence of life. Abiogenesis OR a direct act of Creation both provide the existence of life. You may disagree with Abiogenesis but that does not give you a basis to disagree with evolution.

ah sorry, i forgot to capitalize Evolution which changes the whole thing

 

[Brennan]

A masterful attempt at a meaningful response. Sadly lacking in substance however. Disbelieving in Abiogenesis is no basis for disbelief in Evolution. Or evolution. /wink

 

[busterdog]

A masterful attempt at a meaningful response. Sadly lacking in substance however. Disbelieving in Abiogenesis is no basis for disbelief in Evolution. Or evolution. /wink

I guess you are arguing more against the form of the argument than the YEC position itself, but be careful about the rules here.

THis is not usually the place where it is permitted to argue against the YEC position.

Lots of TEs post here, but they generally don't argue.

Plus, a more even tone benefits everyone.

 

[Brennan]

What argument? Evolution is a process where already existing life changes. Whatever view you might have on Abiogenesis is irrelevant. This is a statement of logical fact: evolution requires life, whether life came about as a result of Creation or spontaneous Abiogenesis is besides the point.

Edit: please note that I am responding to a deliberately leading post. Interesting debate tactic: post a seemingly inncoent query, poohpooh the answer you get and then throw your hands up and deny all right of response by saying 'you can't debate that here!'

 

[Melethiel]

I split some posts from the Creationism forum to here. Please, everyone, remember that the Creationism subforum is a safe haven for Creationists, and not a place for TEs to debate.

 

[KerrMetric]

Interesting debate tactic: post a seemingly inncoent query, poohpooh the answer you get and then throw your hands up and deny all right of response by saying 'you can't debate that here!'

That is exactly the modus operandi of several of the regular posters there. If you can't win an argument use a rules technicality to get a Pyrrhic victory.

 

[Brennan]

I notice that every time I post there...

 

[busterdog]

interesting.

Look up "in the beginning was information" by werner gitt for starters on why 'abiogenesis' isn't feasible.

As you suggest, the processes are distinguishable, but your point is obvious to those who want to hear you: the math problems are much the same for both processes.

 

[Mallon]

Math taught us bumblebees can't fly, too.

 

[KerrMetric]

Math taught us bumblebees can't fly, too.

That is a silly myth.

 

[Mallon]

That is a silly myth.

Exactly.

 

[busterdog]

Math taught us bumblebees can't fly, too.

And that six days of creation is absurd.

 

[chaoschristian]

Back to the OP: is there still a question regarding whether or not the theory of abiogenesis is a part of the theory of evolution, or even, that they may be the same thing?

 

[FranciscanJ]

That is exactly the modus operandi of several of the regular posters there. If you can't win an argument use a rules technicality to get a Pyrrhic victory.

Well, sorry to take us on the tangent again but...

I see the Creationist forums as the YEC's own quiet "coffee shop" and can understand why they don't want us TE's coming in, throwing over their tables, and kung-fu kicking everybody.