My Abiogenesis Challenge

[KWCrazy]

Ever hear my "pond theory?"

Life begins in a pond. Living things need to eat so whatever it is consumes whatever is in the pond to eat. Since living things eat only living things, this strange thing must eat random chemicals or something. Here's the problem. Even if it can asexually reproduce, it comprises 100% of the life forms on earth. It has no predators so its numbers increase geometrically. There is nothing to replenish whatever it happens to be eating, so eventually the food source dries up and everything dies. Why? Because there is no time to adapt and previously there was no evolutionary pressure to adapt. So life, introduced as a singularity, cannot survive.

Abiogenesis doesn't solve the problem. You need multiple life forms simultaneously arriving to have any kind of a life cycle. The "original progenitor" claim is unsupportable at any level.

 

[AV1611VET]

Abiogenesis doesn't solve the problem. You need multiple life forms simultaneously arriving to have any kind of a life cycle. The "original progenitor" claim is unsupportable at any level.

Good point.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Ever hear my "pond theory?"

Life begins in a pond. Living things need to eat so whatever it is consumes whatever is in the pond to eat. Since living things eat only living things, this strange thing must eat random chemicals or something. Here's the problem. Even if it can asexually reproduce, it comprises 100% of the life forms on earth. It has no predators so its numbers increase geometrically. There is nothing to replenish whatever it happens to be eating, so eventually the food source dries up and everything dies. Why? Because there is no time to adapt and previously there was no evolutionary pressure to adapt. So life, introduced as a singularity, cannot survive.

Abiogenesis doesn't solve the problem. You need multiple life forms simultaneously arriving to have any kind of a life cycle. The "original progenitor" claim is unsupportable at any level.

But that's ONLY your own hypothesis (not a theory in the scientific sense, but a hypothesis, a big difference) and one that smacks of personal incredulity.

 

[KWCrazy]

But that's ONLY your own hypothesis (not a theory in the scientific sense, but a hypothesis, a big difference) and one that smacks of personal incredulity.

What do YOU think would happen with a single cell entity which was introduced to a pond? Understand that there could be no evolutionary pressures without predators and the exhaustion of food wouldn't be realized until it was gone. Moreover, what would the cell eat anyway? I submit that there is NO scenario by which an original progenitor can exist in any environment.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What do YOU think would happen with a single cell entity which was introduced to a pond? Understand that there could be no evolutionary pressures without predators and the exhaustion of food wouldn't be realized until it was gone. Moreover, what would the cell eat anyway? I submit that there is NO scenario by which an original progenitor can exist in any environment.

So I can take it that you've never heard of photosynthesis then?

 

[KWCrazy]

Do you realize how complex a life form has to be to be able to feed through photosynthesis? Why not just say God had to do it?
Where would the chlorophyll and carbon dioxide come from?

 

[Speedwell]

Understand that there could be no evolutionary pressures without predators...

Why would we want to "understand" such a silly thing?

 

[HitchSlap]

Hey, chief, I frankly don't care what it is and isn't.

But whatever it is(n't), it falls under one of seven different compartments of cosmic evolution, and I'm asking which one.

No, it doesn't.

 

[AV1611VET]

No, it doesn't.

Yes it does, since cosmic evolution starts at the Big Bong and ends at today.

 

[Skavau]

Hey, chief, I frankly don't care what it is and isn't.

But whatever it is(n't), it falls under one of seven different compartments of cosmic evolution, and I'm asking which one.

There's no such thing as "cosmic evolution". It's a nonsense creationist word.

 

[AV1611VET]

There's no such thing as "cosmic evolution". It's a nonsense creationist word.

QV from Physics Central:

With cosmic evolution as an intellectual framework, we can begin to understand the environmental conditions needed for matter to have become increasingly ordered, organized, and intricately structured, and not merely among biological systems. This trend toward increased complexity throughout Nature writ large violates no laws of physics, and certainly not those of thermodynamics. Indeed, it is modern thermodynamics that perhaps best helps to explain the rise in order, form, and complexity among all animate and inanimate objects.

SOURCE

 

[Skavau]

QV from Physics Central:


SOURCE

That's a link to a book extract. The term is used by the author to categorise and describe a large number of things that cross many areas of research. Okay. So?

It's blatantly "the evolution of those molecules into life itself". So how is this a challenge?

 

[ScottA]

Of course the ladder has a first rung. Something happened to bring life into existence from non-living matter. At this point, scientists can't say exactly what it was. But whatever it was was not the same as what produces the diversity of life after it began. So, it is uneducated and simple-minded to assert that it is useless to study the mechanism producing the diversity of life until science an tell us how it began.

You are making an assumption to make such a claim scientifically...and, going against the word of God.

 

[Speedwell]

You are making an assumption to make such a claim scientifically...and, going against the word of God.

That science doesn't know how life first arose? I believe that to be a fact, not an assumption.

 

[AV1611VET]

That's a link to a book extract. The term is used by the author to categorise and describe a large number of things that cross many areas of research. Okay. So?

It's blatantly "the evolution of those molecules into life itself". So how is this a challenge?

If you want to pretend cosmic evolution doesn't exist, go right ahead.

That's why I called this thread a challenge.

 

[Skavau]

If you want to pretend cosmic evolution doesn't exist, go right ahead.

It's a descriptor used by some people.

What do you think it is exactly?

 

[AV1611VET]

It's a descriptor used by some people.

What do you think it is exactly?

It doesn't matter what I think it is.

What matters is where abiogenesis fits into its picture.

You can think Humpty Dumpty isn't real, but if you were asked where he sat, and you said "In a chair," you would be wrong.

He sat on a wall.

 

[ScottA]

That science doesn't know how life first arose? I believe that to be a fact, not an assumption.

No...that is not the assumption I was referring to. But rather the assumption of considering there must surely be a "first rung" on such a ladder. It is an assumption to say there is a ladder, and it is also an assumption to say there is a first rung when there is no proof. Proof is the hypocritical cornerstone of science.

 

[Speedwell]

No...that is not the assumption I was referring to. But rather the assumption of considering there must surely be a "first rung" on such a ladder. It is an assumption to say there is a ladder, and it is also an assumption to say there is a first rung when there is no proof. Proof is the hypocritical cornerstone of science.

It was a creationist who brought the idea up in this instance, but it is perfectly reasonable: life must exist before biological evolution can occur.

 

[ScottA]

It was a creationist who brought the idea up in this instance, but it is perfectly reasonable: life must exist before biological evolution can occur.

That is the fundamental assumption...that there is biological evolution. Time and the idea of evolution is limited to the created universe. The assumption, is to conclude that within God, whom is the same yesterday, today, and forever, that there is actually a timeline anywhere in His reality - the only reality. To do so, is to live within the fictional bubble that He created (imaged) within His mind's eye. This manifest image...is passing away - He has forgotten the evils hitherto. The only escape is to be born out of this twinkle in His eye, to be born again, out of this passing world and into His reality. His reality...is the only reality.

Science, on the other hand, is little more than a wordsmith within a tale written by an Author they do not know.