Abiogenesis

[HARK!]

You're really not helping your case.

I don't have a case. I'm not here to prove anything. I'm just here to gather opinions; and that pretty much all that has come my way.

 

[SkyWriting]

Oh, but you're willing to just accept that some entity that's outside of the universe just made the universe and tweaked things from outside like they're playing The Sims?

My view is that each identifiable particle of force is on its trajectory, as planned from the start. Each one going where it's supposed to go, each moment.

The Cosmos is like a seed planted with the exact result mapped out moment by moment until fully formed.

 

[muichimotsu]

I don't have a case. I'm not here to prove anything. I'm just here to gather opinions; and that pretty much all that has come my way.

Because if we aren't absolutely certain, it's "just an opinion"? That's not rhetorical spin at all to insinuate you're "right" because we can't "prove" something that isn't proven (science doesn't often deal in that, only formal science at best in the technical use of that term)

 

[HARK!]

Ray Comfort called

Never heard of him.

 

[klutedavid]

Using magic as an answer in an science debate is an auto-loss.

Science makes assumptions and uses axioms without proof. So what's wrong with any other set of assumptions about the causation of life?

 

[muichimotsu]

My view is that each identifiable particle of force is on its trajectory, as planned from the start. Each one going where it's supposed to go, each moment.

So you believe in hard deterministic atomism and God is effectively Laplace's demon? Cute, but demented as well, because it means we have no freewill in a meaningful sense and effectively are pawns in the game of an entity that would seem by that description to be morally questionable in motivation for creating the world.

 

[VirOptimus]

Science makes assumptions and uses axioms without proof. So what's wrong with any other set of assumptions about the causation of life?

At one time there was no life on earth, then it was. So, abiogenesis (life starting) has to have happened.

Therefore the probability is 1:1.

 

[muichimotsu]

Science makes assumptions and uses axioms without proof. So what's wrong with any other set of assumptions about the causation of life?

Because scientific axioms are neutral in application, they're not trying to insinuate things from an anthropocentric perspective that regards us as superior to animals and the like. If this is the best you have, not sure you're remotely understanding science in the first place if you throw out "proof" when talking about natural sciences and suggest that because we cannot have "proof" of such things as uniformity of nature in a scientific manner that we're engaging in faith based claims

 

[VirOptimus]

I'm glad you understand the irony.

oh there is definitly irony here. Not just in the way you think.

 

[muichimotsu]

Never heard of him.

Well, you're basically engaging in his tactics, and I'm genuinely surprised, seeing how much he advertises his tripe. Way of the Master? Kirk Cameron? Evangelists that do selective interviews and try to suggest evolution is something atheists and such have faith in and "even the playing field"?

 

[HARK!]

Life exists on Earth now. At some point it did not. So at some point life began to exist. That is abiogenesis. If it had not happened we would not be alive here to talk about it.

So you're saying that if life was shuttled in from another planet; that's abiogenisis?

 

[Larniavc]

I don't think that I do. I think that it actually takes more faith to believe in abiogenesis.

I think you do believe in abiogenesis. You just don’t want to call it that.

You want to call it creation.

So how about this: God caused abiogenesis several billion years ago?

Could you get behind that?

 

[VirOptimus]

Science makes assumptions and uses axioms without proof. So what's wrong with any other set of assumptions about the causation of life?

You dont seem to understand how science works.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So you're saying that if life was shuttled in from another planet; that's abiogenisis?

So's Law.
That's not what he said in the slightest.

 

[SkyWriting]

So you believe in hard deterministic atomism and God is effectively Laplace's demon? Cute, but demented as well, because it means we have no freewill in a meaningful sense and effectively are pawns in the game of an entity that would seem by that description to be morally questionable in motivation for creating the world.

But you still think you have freewill ina meaningful sense,
so my observation has caused you no harm.
So I am morally safe by telling you.

 

[VirOptimus]

So you're saying that if life was shuttled in from another planet; that's abiogenisis?

That would be abiogenesis yes.

However, there is no data supporting that idea.

 

[SkyWriting]

You dont seem to understand how science works.

He's right. Science offers no proofs. Math does.

 

[HARK!]

Because if we aren't absolutely certain, it's "just an opinion"? That's not rhetorical spin at all to insinuate you're "right" because we can't "prove" something that isn't proven (science doesn't often deal in that, only formal science at best in the technical use of that term)

They might have swiped it from me. I was online taking about the faith of Atheists almost 20 years ago.

 

[SkyWriting]

That would be abiogenesis yes.

However, there is no data supporting that idea.

That's Panspermia. A legit theory.

 

[VirOptimus]

They might have swiped it from me. I was online taking about the faith of Atheists almost 20 years ago.

Please tell me about my ”faith”.