Abiogenesis Progress

[Speedwell]

Are you discounting my story? Or are you really interested in hearing it? I'm not interested in wasting time sharing it if you plan on crapping on it or picking it apart to make me sound like I'm an idiot because I no longer accept evolution as fact. But if you are genuinely interested and want to have a good discussion, I don't mind sharing at all.

It is interesting. Many of us regard coming to Christ and coming to the notion that Genesis is accurate literal history as two different things. Why do you not?

 

[SkyWriting]

Ah, so basically, the best reply you can come up with in a thread started to discuss abiogenesis research is to insult scientists with a totally silly, made up claim about engineers not recognizing chance?

Tell me - why should anyone care what engineers think about abiogenesis, if they even do think what you declare they do?

We love all people equally for one.
And which ones have the imagination needed for building origins stories, I wouldn't know.
I didn't say that they don't recognise chance, I said they can show that there
are no random events in physics other than events which people are unable
to understand well enough.

You know...cause---->effect.
Things happen for reasons.

 

[SkyWriting]

Incredibly, Google has a site called GoogleScholar.

There, one can - are you ready - Google citations!


Isn't that amazing?

True. But not scientific.

 

[Saucy]

Do tell - explain the probability of it all, and especially explain how calculating such a thing is even relevant..



Great discussion of science.

I haven't seen the whole 'the experiments are intelligently designed, so intelligent design is true!' routine in a number of years.



Yes, sure you were.
Witnessing is so impressive.


What a coincidence! So it doesn't make sense.... I do wonder - what is your science background?


Cart before the horse much?



Awesome analogy.

But who cares about analogies and probabilities?

Was his probability premised on the simplest living thing popping into existence all at once by chance?

If so, who cares what he thought?

Amazing series of assertions, all apparently premised on some bogus 'probability' claims.

Did you read that on Coppedge's site?

Hey, you come off like a jerk who only wants to mock my own personal journey, so it's not worth wasting time explaining it to you.

 

[Speedwell]

Hey, you come off like a jerk who only wants to mock my own personal journey, so it's not worth wasting time explaining it to you.

Nobody is mocking your personal journey--they're mocking bad science.

 

[Saucy]

Nobody is mocking your personal journey--they're mocking bad science.

No, they're mocking my story. And being incredibly condescending while calling others condescending.

When I said I used to be an evolutionist:

"Yes, sure you were.
Witnessing is so impressive."

When I said finding Christ changed everything:

"What a coincidence!"

Yeah, he's being a jerk.

Hey, instead of going around and deploying the old debate trick where you try to go after sources and insult others, maybe actually contribute something to the thread? Evidence of your own?

That's what I don't get about these types of discussions. None of you bring anything to back up why we're so wrong. You just say we're wrong, imply we're idiots, question our background, make personal attacks, trash our sources, then move on.

 

[Saucy]

But do engineers understand evolution?

Many understand it very well, and make very convincing arguments and engage in very nice research about it (Robert Flake, for example, whose work help undercut the notion of 'Haldane's dilemma').

Those that are also creationists, however, seem to purposefully ignore the biology. Walt Brown, for example.

Bill Nye has a bachelor's in mechanical engineering, but people think he's qualified to talk about science.

 

[Speedwell]

We love all people equally for one.
And which ones have the imagination needed for building origins stories, I wouldn't know.
I didn't say that they don't recognise chance, I said they can show that there
are no random events in physics other than events which people are unable
to understand well enough.

You know...cause---->effect.
Things happen for reasons.

But "random" as the term is used in science and engineering does not mean without cause or purpose. It merely means unpredictable.

For example, the term "random variation" as used in evolutionary theory does not mean that the variation is uncaused. It merely means that the variation is randomly distributed, that is, it forms a "bell curve."

 

[AV1611VET]

Eagerly awaiting your list of creation science research publications in which claims in Genesis are tested for plausibility.

You must have me mixed up with someone else.

"Creation science" is a contradiction in terms and can take a hike.

 

[Saucy]

Want some cheese?

So prove you are right - lets see the EVIDENCE that the creation tale in Genesis is RIGHT.

Attacking abiogenesis is NOT evidence that creation is right.

There's a lot of science that hasn't been proven. It's forever stuck in the hypothesis stage because there was no one around billions of years ago to witness and record what happened.

All you have is how things are naturally progressing RIGHT NOW. Science is naturalistic by nature, which is perfectly understandable. I don't hate science. I'm not at war with science. I love studying things! Astronomy was always my thing.

It's assumed that Christians are only Christians because they were brain-washed, but my parents weren't Christians. We didn't go to church. We never talked about God. We didn't own a bible. I was that science geek who entered all the science fairs (and my presentation on planets even got me to the regional fair, but I got crushed.

One of my most favorite memories with my dad was when he took me to a planetarium and observatory to see Comet Hale-Bopp. I collected rocks and fossils, watched Jurassic Park almost non-stop because it was my favorite movie, knew that the raptors in the movie were too big, and on and on.

I remember in high school I took a college oceanography course and we watched a documentary on whale evolution when the professor was out. My lab partner, who became my friend, was a Christian and I would tease him. "How can you believe in God? Didn't you watch and see how whales evolved over millions of years from land-dwelling creatures?" but he stuck to his guns.

A few years later after I graduated, I had a supernatural encounter with God that made me question everything I know about everything in life and have spent the last 13 or so years of my life trying to find answers.

Do I claim to be a foremost science expert? No. I consider my interest as hobby and a love to learn things. Recently I've been studying UY Scuti and Betelgeuse. Betelgeuse is due to go supernova any moment between now and 100,000 years from now. It would be pretty awesome to see, considering it would most likely light up the night sky brighter than a full moon.

As much as I love science and considered being an astronomer, my math skills are quite poor and I ended up becoming a writer instead. I got my college degree in journalism and technical writing and am a published author. And yes, I realize I did plagiarize by borrowing a quote I didn't attribute. I'm usually very good at that if you were to see previous posts of mine, so please consider this a slip of protocol rather than me just being a dishonest person.

 

[Astrophile]

Are you discounting my story? Or are you really interested in hearing it? I'm not interested in wasting time sharing it if you plan on crapping on it or picking it apart to make me sound like I'm an idiot because I no longer accept evolution as fact. But if you are genuinely interested and want to have a good discussion, I don't mind sharing at all.

Yes, I am genuinely interested in hearing your story, both how you found Jesus and why you no longer accept evolution as fact.

 

[Saucy]

My view on science is that it is naturalistic and tries to explain the universe in a naturalistic way. But if God exists, as I believe He does, then things didn't happen naturally. They were supernaturally created by a Force even greater than that in the whole universe. It's a Force that exists outside of time and space.

If God had chosen to create the universe and the earth through the methods described in science, I would accept it no problem. I don't have a problem with evolution on its face. If that's how God created and sustained life, over billions of years, then great! But that's not how He told us it happened. We speak about Adam and Eve like they weren't real, but even Jesus spoke of them as if they were real. His genealogy goes all the way back to Adam as listed in the bible. He speaks about the flood and creation, as He was the One there who created it all! I think Jesus as a source beats every scientist combined since He was actually there to not only witness, but took part in the creating process.

But to go even deeper, a supernatural God cancels out a naturalistic process. Things may be progressing a certain way right now, but that doesn't mean it started that way from the beginning. Maybe you only have to go back a short distance rather than billions of years.

Here's what I mean:

When Adam and Eve were created and put in the garden, life was already flourishing. The trees were full-sized and had fruit on them. The animals (and Adam and Eve) were full-sized adults and able to reproduce. If you were to transport a modern scientist into the Garden of Eden to investigate, he would come to the same conclusions of billions of years, even though all life, space, the stars, etc, were just created minutes before.

For me, I don't feel I have the right to question God. I've had a lot of heartache and headaches trying to reconcile the two worlds, but if God is real, and I experienced Him, so I KNOW with 0% doubt God is real, then the supernatural exists. The spirit world exists. Demons and angels are around us right this second. We can't see them unless they want to be see (and yes, I've seen some demonic stuff as well).

I have friends and family who have experienced supernatural things. My friend was a missionary and recalled seeing someone floating above their bed Exorcist style and he's a guy who I personally have known for many years and he doesn't lie about stuff like that, plus it was confirmed by another witness who was there and saw it.

My mom told me her and her sisters came downstairs in their house as a kid and saw a woman and another child in the kitchen and they suddenly vanished into thin air.

At the core of it, humans are fallible, so science is fallible. Mistakes can be made, even if you get a hundred scientists to get together and affirm something. It's possible they act with a set of inherent biases as well, making assumptions on preconceived ideas when it comes to things they can't prove, but it's taught as absolute fact.

I'm sorry, but no one has seen man evolve from an ancestor into modern humans. All we have are a few bone fragments that when you see them in a museum, most of the 'creature' is imagined with plaster.

 

[Speedwell]

My view on science is that it is naturalistic and tries to explain the universe in a naturalistic way. But if God exists, as I believe He does, then things didn't happen naturally. They were supernaturally created by a Force even greater than that in the whole universe. It's a Force that exists outside of time and space.

If God had chosen to create the universe and the earth through the methods described in science, I would accept it no problem. I don't have a problem with evolution on its face. If that's how God created and sustained life, over billions of years, then great! But that's not how He told us it happened. We speak about Adam and Eve like they weren't real, but even Jesus spoke of them as if they were real. His genealogy goes all the way back to Adam as listed in the bible. He speaks about the flood and creation, as He was the One there who created it all! I think Jesus as a source beats every scientist combined since He was actually there to not only witness, but took part in the creating process.

But to go even deeper, a supernatural God cancels out a naturalistic process. Things may be progressing a certain way right now, but that doesn't mean it started that way from the beginning. Maybe you only have to go back a short distance rather than billions of years.

Here's what I mean:

When Adam and Eve were created and put in the garden, life was already flourishing. The trees were full-sized and had fruit on them. The animals (and Adam and Eve) were full-sized adults and able to reproduce. If you were to transport a modern scientist into the Garden of Eden to investigate, he would come to the same conclusions of billions of years, even though all life, space, the stars, etc, were just created minutes before.

For me, I don't feel I have the right to question God. I've had a lot of heartache and headaches trying to reconcile the two worlds, but if God is real, and I experienced Him, so I KNOW with 0% doubt God is real, then the supernatural exists. The spirit world exists. Demons and angels are around us right this second. We can't see them unless they want to be see (and yes, I've seen some demonic stuff as well).

I have friends and family who have experienced supernatural things. My friend was a missionary and recalled seeing someone floating above their bed Exorcist style and he's a guy who I personally have known for many years and he doesn't lie about stuff like that, plus it was confirmed by another witness who was there and saw it.

My mom told me her and her sisters came downstairs in their house as a kid and saw a woman and another child in the kitchen and they suddenly vanished into thin air.

At the core of it, humans are fallible, so science is fallible. Mistakes can be made, even if you get a hundred scientists to get together and affirm something. It's possible they act with a set of inherent biases as well, making assumptions on preconceived ideas when it comes to things they can't prove, but it's taught as absolute fact.

I'm sorry, but no one has seen man evolve from an ancestor into modern humans. All we have are a few bone fragments that when you see them in a museum, most of the 'creature' is imagined with plaster.

So in other words, you found Christ with the help of those who believe in the literal inerrancy of scripture and think the two are inseparable.

 

[pitabread]

(and yes, I've seen some demonic stuff as well).

Out of curiosity, what have you seen?

 

[Astrophile]

One of my most favorite memories with my dad was when he took me to a planetarium and observatory to see Comet Hale-Bopp. I collected rocks and fossils, watched Jurassic Park almost non-stop because it was my favorite movie, knew that the raptors in the movie were too big, and on and on.

Would you mind telling me how old you are? The fact that you mention Jurassic Park (1993) and Comet Hale Bopp (1996-7) suggests that you are in your middle or late 30s, and therefore that you were born in about 1980±3. This is not merely idle curiosity; it would help me to understand your intellectual history if I knew your age.

Do I claim to be a foremost science expert? No. I consider my interest as hobby and I love to learn things. Recently I've been studying UY Scuti and Betelgeuse. Betelgeuse is due to go supernova any moment between now and 100,000 years from now. It would be pretty awesome to see, considering it would most likely light up the night sky brighter than a full moon.

Thank-you for this contribution. Do you actually observe variable stars, or do you just read about them? Either way, these variable stars are fascinating objects; this summer I must try to find UY Scuti, if there are any clear nights.

 

[Saucy]

So in other words, you found Christ with the help of those who believe in the literal inerrancy of scripture and think the two are inseparable.

Well, as I stated, it's been a give and take. I'm on the fence about a lot of things. I don't consider myself as someone who has absolute knowledge about anything, but a student of all things. I have a difficult time, though, with 'facts' that constantly change. One of the first moments happened when I was trying to get involved in a debate where I was made into a fool because I was reciting stuff I learned in high school.

The fact is, most of the stuff I was taught about science in school is now obsolete. A lot of the stuff being written right now might be obsolete in the next 10-20 years. Science is an evolving practice and I have a difficult time with someone telling me something is a FACT when it's a THEORY with multiple moving parts that changes often.

It's difficult to reconcile. And the more discoveries that are made, the closer it draws me to God because I see how complex, yet fragile life is.

 

[Saucy]

Would you mind telling me how old you are? The fact that you mention Jurassic Park (1993) and Comet Hale Bopp (1996-7) suggests that you are in your middle or late 30s, and therefore that you were born in about 1980±3. This is not merely idle curiosity; it would help me to understand your intellectual history if I knew your age.



Thank-you for this contribution. Do you actually observe variable stars, or do you just read about them? Either way, these variable stars are fascinating objects; this summer I must try to find UY Scuti, if there are any clear nights.

haha you're about right. I'm 33. Born in 1984.

 

[Speedwell]

Well, as I stated, it's been a give and take. I'm on the fence about a lot of things. I don't consider myself as someone who has absolute knowledge about anything, but a student of all things. I have a difficult time, though, with 'facts' that constantly change. One of the first moments happened when I was trying to get involved in a debate where I was made into a fool because I was reciting stuff I learned in high school.

The fact is, most of the stuff I was taught about science in school is now obsolete. A lot of the stuff being written right now might be obsolete in the next 10-20 years. Science is an evolving practice and I have a difficult time with someone telling me something is a FACT when it's a THEORY with multiple moving parts that changes often.

It's difficult to reconcile. And the more discoveries that are made, the closer it draws me to God because I see how complex, yet fragile life is.

Well, if you want someone to commiserate with about how badly science is taught in high school, I'm your man. If I didn't know any more about evolution than is commonly taught there, I probably wouldn't have much confidence in it either. It has to do with science textbooks that aren't written by scientists and science teachers having probably not even undergraduate training in the subject. I'm sorry you were embarrassed by it--no good teacher of biology would tell you that the theory of evolution is a "fact."

 

[Non sequitur]

Well, if you want someone to commiserate with about how badly science is taught in high school, I'm your man. If I didn't know any more about evolution than is commonly taught there, I probably wouldn't have much confidence in it either. It has to do with science textbooks that aren't written by scientists and science teachers having probably not even undergraduate training in the subject. I'm sorry you were embarrassed by it--no good teacher of biology would tell you that the theory of evolution is a "fact."

"Evolution is as much a fact as anything we know in science."

Ken Miller (the Professor of Biology at Brown) will be crushed.

 

[Speedwell]

"Evolution is as much a fact as anything we know in science."

Ken Miller (the Professor of Biology at Brown) will be crushed.

Even so, the principle purpose of basic science classes at the secondary level is to teach the epistemology of science. The distinction between fact and theory should be carefully and clearly drawn.