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.
He's come across a way of describing 'the rise of complexity in nature' in terms of seven 'cosmic epochs'. It's based on a 15-year-old popular science book by Harvard astrophysicist Eric Chaisson, "Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature". Harvard Uni have a web site based on it.Which philosophy would that be?
Ponds are teeming with single cell organisms.What do YOU think would happen with a single cell entity which was introduced to a pond?
Wrong. Understand that 'evolutionary pressures' are anything that reduces reproductive fitness. The exhaustion of food itself would be an evolutionary (selective) pressure.Understand that there could be no evolutionary pressures without predators and the exhaustion of food wouldn't be realized until it was gone.
It's a mistake to use your own lack of knowledge and imagination as a guide to what is or isn't possible.Moreover, what would the cell eat anyway? I submit that there is NO scenario by which an original progenitor can exist in any environment.
And why does AV think it´s my position and wants me to explain adn justify it to him?He's come across a way of describing 'the rise of complexity in nature' in terms of seven 'cosmic epochs'. It's based on a 15-year-old popular science book by Harvard astrophysicist Eric Chaisson, "Cosmic Evolution: The Rise of Complexity in Nature". Harvard Uni have a web site based on it.
It's not a philosophy, just an educational perspective.
Abiogenesis is under the discipline of biochemistry.but then you didn't tell me which compartment abiogenesis occurred.
So?Abiogenesis is under the discipline of biochemistry.
What isn't? abiogenesis, or this biochemistry you keep wanting to add to this thread?Larnievc said:That is not the theory of evolution.
None of it.Larnievc said:What part of that does not answer your challenge?
Charitably, it's probably just him being provocative.And why does AV think it´s my position and wants me to explain adn justify it to him?
M ... moi!?Charitably, it's probably just him being provocative.
So?
I don't care if it falls under coin collecting.What isn't? abiogenesis, or this biochemistry you keep wanting to add to this thread?None of it.
I'm only looking for a two-word answer -- (or just one, if two is too hard):
And if one word is too hard, just give me the corresponding number.
- particulate
- galactic
- stellar
- planetary
- chemical
- biological
- cultural
There, I did your work for you.
You're welcome!
NOW will you answer the challenge?
The best fit would be biological or chemical.So?
I don't care if it falls under coin collecting.What isn't? abiogenesis, or this biochemistry you keep wanting to add to this thread?None of it.
I'm only looking for a two-word answer -- (or just one, if two is too hard):
And if one word is too hard, just give me the corresponding number.
- particulate
- galactic
- stellar
- planetary
- chemical
- biological
- cultural
There, I did your work for you.
You're welcome!
NOW will you answer the challenge?
What part of cosmic evolution is abiogenesis under?
Tell that to Carl Linnaeus and his modern-day followers.Contents, fact, reality, not terminology and classifications.
Tell that to Carl Linnaeus and his modern-day followers.
They're easy to find.Where to find them?
Show me from a Harvard site where the Bible mentions it.
Show me from a NASA site where the Bible mentions it.
Show me from Wikipedia where the Bible mentions it.
I think I've done my part in educating you guys about your own philosophy.
Now it's your turn to answer this challenge or gracefully bow out.
Because biological evolution is listed as #6 on the list of cosmological evolution (see Post 66).So why in the world do you insist on saying that biological evolution is a part of cosmological evolution when you have been repeatedly told it is not?
What about it?Methinks you need to have a read of Post #61 again.
What about it?
I even rated it INFORMATIVE.
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?