Abiogenesis

[renniks]

So how do you interpret the evidence? As the serial de novo creation and extinction of species over time which just happens to give the appearance of evolutionary development?

It gives all the appearance of creation with built-in mechanisms for adaptation. I've spent most of my life in the outdoors. I see no evidence for one species ability to become another species.

 

[HitchSlap]

Lol, what's hard to understand about a total naturalistic world? "Morals are an emergent trait." Come on, that is meaningless. Nothing matters but the perpetuation of the species.
Now, you might be the most moral fella on the face of the planet, but it still doesn't change the fact that you have no basis for morality. At least some atheists admit the obvious.

Sure we do, and it’s a higher morality than the bible, and it comports with reality.

 

[Speedwell]

It gives all the appearance of creation with built-in mechanisms for adaptation. I've spent most of my life in the outdoors. I see no evidence for one species ability to become another species.

Yet it has been observed, even if you, personally have never seen it. There is no doubt that speciation occurs--it's one of the facts that the theory of evolution has to explain. How does your theory explain it?

 

[HitchSlap]

It gives all the appearance of creation with built-in mechanisms for adaptation. I've spent most of my life in the outdoors. I see no evidence for one species ability to become another species.

Spending time in the outdoors doesn’t make you an evolutionary biologist anymore than spending time in your garage makes you a car.

I suggest you earn a real PhD in a relevant field, then turn the ToE on its ear and get your Nobel prize kid.

Now, if you’d like to learn about ToE, then ask a proper question and pipe down. There are plenty of educated members here who will be glad to help you with a real understanding of ToE. But until you cool your jets and stop acting like petulant child, you’ll never grow as a person. Getting your info from pseudoscientific sources will only stunt your growth. It’s time to spread your wings and fly like a big boy.

 

[Ophiolite]

Now, you might be the most moral fella on the face of the planet, but it still doesn't change the fact that you have no basis for morality. At least some atheists admit the obvious.

As saying goes, if I valued your opinion I would be offended.

The basis for morality is, as you noted, survival of the species. This has been extended by some of us - because we are a social, cooperative species - to include the biosphere at large. I think a morality based upon attention to and protection of the rich diversity of life on the planet is a more soundly based morality than the interpretation of instinctive drives by a pastoral tribe with a limited worldview three millennia ago.

 

[Norbert L]

How should we view it?

James Tour who is a scientist and works with molecules and has turned them into robots (Nanotechnology), explains the immense problems of jumping from inorganic to organic matter at the molecular level. He plainly states that if a person "has been taught that simple forms of life have been made, that is a lie".

 

[Subduction Zone]

James Tour who is a scientist and works with molecules and has turned them into robots, explains the immense problems of jumping from inorganic to organic matter at the molecular level. He plainly states that if a person "has been taught that simple forms of life have been made, that is a lie".

James Tour was caught lying himself in one of his videos. He lied so grossly about Jack Szostak that he even gave a mealy mouthed apology.

 

[HARK!]

James Tour who is a scientist and works with molecules and has turned them into robots (Nanotechnology), explains the immense problems of jumping from inorganic to organic matter at the molecular level. He plainly states that if a person "has been taught that simple forms of life have been made, that is a lie".

Good stuff!

The part about the Proto-Turkeys was hilarious.

Proto-Turkeys

Origin of Life protocell assembly is akin to buying 20 pounds of sliced turkey meat, adding a gallon of turkey broth, warming, sticking in a few feathers and suggesting that a live turkey will eventually come gobbling out if given enough time, or that a "proto-turkey" or "extant turkey" has been synthesized.

 

[renniks]

As saying goes, if I valued your opinion I would be offended.

The basis for morality is, as you noted, survival of the species. This has been extended by some of us - because we are a social, cooperative species - to include the biosphere at large. I think a morality based upon attention to and protection of the rich diversity of life on the planet is a more soundly based morality than the interpretation of instinctive drives by a pastoral tribe with a limited worldview three millennia ago.

If the basis is survival, my survival will always be more important than the survival of the whole. That's just selfish human nature. If the basis for morality is the sacrificial love of Christ, then I can sacrifice myself if needed to save others.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If the basis is survival, my survival will always be more important than the survival of the whole. That's just selfish human nature. If the basis for morality is the sacrificial love of Christ, then I can sacrifice myself if needed to save others.

Nope, why can't creationists understand this? Evolution works on populations not individuals. What is kept and passed on is what is good for the species. I guess that is what happens when one is excessively literal in one's thinking.

 

[HARK!]

James Tour was caught lying himself in one of his videos. He lied so grossly about Jack Szostak that he even gave a mealy mouthed apology.

I didn't catch him in any lies in this video; but he sure did expose a lot of them.

 

[renniks]

Nope, why can't creationists understand this? Evolution works on populations not individuals. What is kept and passed on is what is good for the species. I guess that is what happens when one is excessively literal in one's thinking.

How can the individual survive initially if he or she or it isn't focused on its own survival? How much time have your spent raising animals? Except for the mother instinct, which is obviously God-given, animals are at least as selfish and self-centered as human babies. There is always a pecking order where the strongest member gets to rule over the others. He or she does not care if the weak ones die. Humans do it too. It's only God's image in us that causes us to quell our natural selfishness.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How can the individual survive initially if he or she or it isn't focused on its own survival? How much time have your spent raising animals? Except for the mother instinct, which is obviously God-given, animals are at least as selfish and self-centered as human babies. There is always a pecking order where the strongest member gets to rule over the others. He or she does not care if the weak ones die. Humans do it too. It's only God's image in us that causes us to quell our natural selfishness.

First drop the Black and White fallacies. That is a major problem with creationists. Yes, individual survival is important, but excessive self interest is bad for the population. If an organism kills everyone all other organisms in self interest that organism will be the last of its line.

And other animals, don't forget you are an animal too, are not all selfish. Many species warn other members when a danger approaches.

In an argument on morality you will lose since Biblical morality is inferior to secular morality.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Good stuff!

The part about the Proto-Turkeys was hilarious.

Proto-Turkeys

Origin of Life protocell assembly is akin to buying 20 pounds of sliced turkey meat, adding a gallon of turkey broth, warming, sticking in a few feathers and suggesting that a live turkey will eventually come gobbling out if given enough time, or that a "proto-turkey" or "extant turkey" has been synthesized.

Yes, creationists love them strawman arguments in the morning. Mental dietary fiber helps clean out that disturbing knowledge they are having problems digesting.

 

[HARK!]

Yes, creationists love them strawman arguments in the morning. Mental dietary fiber helps clean out that disturbing knowledge they are having problems digesting.

What strawman arguments would those be? He was quoting directly from respected scientific journals.

Please quote the strawman arguments presented in this video.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What strawman arguments would those be? He was quoting directly from respected scientific journals.

Please quote the strawman arguments presented in this video.

And misrepresenting them as shown by quotes. I have no respect for Tour since he has been caught lying in his videos. In fact lying to such an investigation extent that he offered what looked like a fake apology to Jack Szostak. And fake because he never asked that the videos with his lies in them are still up and still have his lies in them. Why did he not ask that they be taken down?

 

[renniks]

In an argument on morality you will lose since Biblical morality is inferior to secular morality

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

 

[renniks]

First drop the Black and White fallacies. That is a major problem with creationists. Yes, individual survival is important, but excessive self interest is bad for the population. If an organism kills everyone all other organisms in self interest that organism will be the last of its line.

Lol, and the animal knows all this how? An animal knows: eat, drink, comfort and sex. It doesn't care about anything else.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

That is demonstrably wrong again. The problem with Biblical morality is that it cannot change. Slavery is still okay because "God says so". In fact to change Biblical morality Christians rely on secular morality and then try to claim that the Bible always said that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Lol, and the animal knows all this how? An animal knows: eat, drink, comfort and sex. It doesn't care about anything else.

Animals don't have to know thus. Please drop the condescending strawman arguments.