Subduction Zone
Regular Member
They really don't At least not in the sense that you are using the term. And no, "specified and complex information" is just a garbage term that creationists use. They cannot properly define it.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
They really don't At least not in the sense that you are using the term. And no, "specified and complex information" is just a garbage term that creationists use. They cannot properly define it.Nice attempt at deflection from the fact that even many evolutionists today admit DNA is a biological programming language code that all cells have as their operating system, containing specified and complex information, and that language and information only come from an intelligent mind.
Whew!! It is a good thing that abiogenesis does not rely on that then.The odds that life appeared on earth are 1:1.
The odds that life appeared because of random bonding of chemicals in a prebiotic soup: beyond impossible.
And THAT’S how probability works.
The evolution of autocatalytic sets in molecular replication, (ie: Abiogenesis), is a function of time .. which is supported by evidence of the complexity seen in the simplest cells.
Whew!! It is a good thing that abiogenesis does not rely on that then.
Its true that some reactions stop (for several reasons). Its also true that many don't. Some oscillate also. When left alone, eventually, a spontaneous phase transition occurs across the whole mix and complex life functions emerge (like metabolism) .. along with increasingly complex proteins (in Abiogensis hypotheses)... all supported in objective evidence.Wrong. As Professor James Tour points out, the organic chemicals required for abiogenesis degrade very quickly, so time works against it, not for it.
That’s why researchers in labs have to stop chemical processes and remove them from the apparatus before they polymerize., when they create them.
There really is not. If there were you would have posted them.There’s a long list of evolutionists who disagree with you.
Who cares? (Even if there is).There’s a long list of evolutionists who disagree with you.
Odds of 1 in 97 billion are infinitesimally small.No, the odds are still 1:1.
Can you name some--abiogenesis researchers who believe that the first living cell assembled spontaneously from organic chemicals?There’s a long list of evolutionists who disagree with you.
There really is not. If there were you would have posted them.
The problem appears to be in your understanding. When someone tries to claim that abiogenesis is "random" they demonstrate that they do not understand the laws of chemistry. One of the reasons that all of the odds arguments fail is because they are all strawman argument. Identify the strawman and the argument fails without any math being done at all. Reactions are not "random". They are very limited.
No, they really are not. Those are creationist arguments.These are evolutionist calculating the odds, so the straw man argument is yours.
So far he only appears to have incorrect claims that he will not support.Can you name some--abiogenesis researchers who believe that the first living cell assembled spontaneously from organic chemicals?
If God says otherwise, the odds of it happening are 1 in 0.The odds that organic chemicals can become a living cell are between 1 in 97 billion and up, which is impossible odds.
Look up abiogenesis in the dictionary.Can you name some--abiogenesis researchers who believe that the first living cell assembled spontaneously from non-living chemicals?
1 to the 97 billionth power is 1, so you may be nearer to the mark than you thought. I'm not going to ask where you got this number from; I suspect that it was a scientist who was teasing you and making fun of your ignorance of mathematics.
LOL!!! You never go to a non-technical source in a technical debate. Dictionaries simplify concepts too far to be of any use.Look up abiogenesis in the dictionary.
By definition abiogenesis research is researching chemical evolution by organic chemicals randomly bonding together.
Correction, in any strawman version of abiogenesis.The odds are 1 in 97 billion for the simplest cell to form in any. prebiotic scenario.
This is the first hit I got:Look up abiogenesis in the dictionary.
By definition abiogenesis research is researching chemical evolution by organic chemicals randomly bonding together.
Fred Hoyle was a physicist. His opinion would be no more valid than mine. This is what happens when people do not understand the scientific method. You need to find experts in the field. Not physicists or dentists.Yockey, Fred Hoyle, Axe, and others.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?