Origin of Life

[Bradskii]

Would you say then, that a living [plant or] animal is a gestalt?

That is, it is greater than the sum of its parts?

No, it is the actual sum of it's parts. That's why there is no single definition. It's a combination of things that determine if something is alive.

As Kent pointed out, once you shut the blender off, you still need to introduce energy back into the equation.

We've gone through this. We all agree, including Hovind, that you can't simply mix the constituents and immediately get all the characteristics appearing (plugging them into the mains makes no difference). It's like Hoyle's metaphor of a tornado through a junkyard producing a 747. It ain't going to happen. So we'll ignore that and investigate how it could happen.

We need to go back to looking at dealing cards. That will give you an idea how it all works (as opposed to 'frog in blender')...

 

[AV1611VET]

No, it is the actual sum of it's parts.

I'm going to disagree here.

That's why there is no single definition. It's a combination of things that determine if something is alive.

Yes -- those eight characteristics you showed earlier.

We've gone through this. We all agree, including Hovind, that you can't simply mix the constituents and immediately get all the characteristics appearing (plugging them into the mains makes no difference).

I agree.

But the point is that, after the blender is shut off, you have all the hardware necessary for life to occur.

In fact, life occupied that hardware at one point in time.

Then the life/hardware were put into a blender, and the life left it, but all the hardware remains.

The question is:

Why can't life emerge then from that pool of "biotic soup"?

It's like Hoyle's metaphor of a tornado through a junkyard producing a 747.

Not exactly.

It would be more like the only thing in that junkyard were the hardware needed to make a 747.

Then a tornado goes through it and -- bingo -- a 747.

But comparing a frog to a 747 is a poor comparison in the first place.

What if you had a 747 that flies all over the world, then it gets hit by a tornado, then each and every part is reassembled back to original specs -- but -- for some reason -- the 747 will not fly?

As if it was alive at one point, then died, and you can't get it to fly anymore.

It ain't going to happen. So we'll ignore that and investigate how it could happen.

We need to go back to looking at dealing cards. That will give you an idea how it all works (as opposed to 'frog in blender')...

Okay.

I'll go back and take a look at your deck of cards more seriously.

 

[AV1611VET]

Kent Hovind? In the year of Our Lord 2025? Really?

Yes, really.

You can't lock truth behind iron bars.

 

[AV1611VET]

It's like saying that you could get a pack of cards and shuffle them (all the constituent parts are there) and then deal A, 2, 3 etc of clubs, diamonds, hearts and spades - all in order. Again, the odds of that happening (I just checked) are 1 in 8.065e+67, which is about the same number as the number of atoms in our galaxy.

Fine.

But let's make this even harder.

In a laboratory, put the cards back together in their previous order.

What's changed? anything?

The cards were "alive" once.

Then the cellophane was removed, the cards were shuffled, and they were "killed."

Manhandling them killed them, and now they'll never be the same.

 

[Bradskii]

I'm going to disagree here.

Obviously. But it doesn't really change anything regards the matter at hand. God can install a soul anytime He wants.

I agree.

But the point is that, after the blender is shut off, you have all the hardware necessary for life to occur.

Why can't life emerge then from that pool of "biotic soup"?

It can't do it all instantly. As we agreed (as you just agreed above). If there is a 'biotic soup' then you need very many interactions between various materials to start the process. And the number of interactions and the time for each to happen is considerable. And each has to happen in sequence. Like you build a house. You start with foundations, then you build the frame. Then add the external walls etc etc. Throwing concrete and bricks and wood together randomly wouldn't work.

The hurricane in the junkyard is the same metaphor. The 747 isn't going to simply emerge fully formed. To get to that point you needed gliders to start. Then clumsy powered flight. Then control surfaces. First it was wood and fabric. Then metal, then aluminium then composites, then propellers, then jet engines...you can't jump from no aircraft straight to a 747.

As if it was alive at one point, then died, and you can't get it to fly anymore.

The pieces will often degenerate if they are not still part of the original system. But if you store them properly then you could rebuild it. Just like if you cut a leg off, if it is done so the leg doesn't start decomposing then you can reattach it on times. If your heart gives out you can get a new one. But there is currently a medical limit as to what can be taken out and replaced.

I'll go back and take a look at your deck of cards more seriously.

Cool.

 

[Bradskii]

Fine.

But let's make this even harder.

In a laboratory, put the cards back together in their previous order.

What's changed? anything?

The cards were "alive" once.

Then the cellophane was removed, the cards were shuffled, and they were "killed."

Manhandling them killed them, and now they'll never be the same.

We're assuming that the cards were in a random state to begin with. The 'prebiotic soup'. All the ingredients are there but no order. Get them in a particular order and you end up with life. Dealing cards randomly and hoping to get the sequence right in any given deal is all but impossible (frog in a blender). But if there is tiny advantage in getting a specific card out first, then there'll be a tendency for that second card to associate itself with the first when it is dealt. And the sequence gradually builds, until you have all the cards in the order that you want.

 

[AV1611VET]

God can install a soul anytime He wants.

And so let's simplify this conversation.

Assuming you know the story of the Valley of Dry Bones, I'm going to make the point that life consists of more than just hardware and energy.

Life is a gestalt, and contains things that science cannot detect with even their most sensitive instruments.

 

[AV1611VET]

We're assuming that the cards were in a random state to begin with.

Oh, okay, I missed that.

Sorry.

I thought you meant a new unopened deck.

The 'prebiotic soup'. All the ingredients are there but no order.

Okay.

Get them in a particular order and you end up with life.

Yes, but in the case of Adam & Eve, God did get them in the right order (dust of the ground, Adam's rib), but did one more thing:

He breathed life into their nostrils.

And man became -- as far as can be detected -- a gestalt.

I mean, if you want to include God's breath as part of man, then no ... he is not a gestalt ... as God's breath is part of Adam's sum total.

Thus Adam is not more than the sum of his parts.

But from science's perspective, God's breath cannot be detected.

So in essence, Adam is greater than the sum of his [detectable] parts.

I hope this makes sense.

 

[Bradskii]

And so let's simplify this conversation.

Assuming you know the story of the Valley of Dry Bones, I'm going to make the point that life consists of more than just hardware and energy.

Again, no problem. If there's 'something else' that you think is needed then be my guest. I'm explaining the biology as this is the Physical and Life Sciences section. If you want to discuss theology then take it elsewhere. We don't want the thread derailed now, do we...So let's concentrate on the science.

 

[AV1611VET]

Again, no problem.

Good.

If there's 'something else' that you think is needed then be my guest.

There is.

And for the sake of arguing, let's call this something else "vital energy."

God created the hardware in Genesis 1, then imbued it with vital energy, and life was kick-started.

If scientists can do the exact same thing and put the exact same hardware together, they'll hit a dead end (no pun intended).

They can't imbue their creations with vital energy.

I'm explaining the biology as this is the Physical and Life Sciences section. If you want to discuss theology then take it elsewhere. We don't want the thread derailed now, do we...So let's concentrate on the science.

That's what Kent Hovind and David Mainse are doing.

They are concentrating on just the science and showing that life cannot arise on its own -- even if all the ingredients are there in the right order.

They are showing that abiogenesis is a lie.

So let's do.

I'm game.

Let's discuss how life originated, using science only; and I'll use my near-zero knowledge of science, as well as try my best to leave theology out of the discussion, and we'll see where this goes.

I need the exercise!

 

[Bradskii]

Good.

There is.

And for the sake of arguing, let's call this something else "vital energy."

Let's not. There is nothing in science that equates to that. And again, this is the science section.

That's what Kent Hovind and David Mainse are doing. They are concentrating on just the science and showing that life cannot arise on its own -- even if all the ingredients are there in the right order.

If all the characteristics are there, then we have life. There is no argument about that. It's the definition of life. We've covered this.

They are showing that abiogenesis is a lie.

Hovind is ignorant as to how it started. He can't argue against something he doesn't understand. Neither, for that matter, can you.

Let's discuss how life originated, using science only; and I'll use my near-zero knowledge of science, as well as try my best to leave theology out of the discussion, and we'll see where this goes.

That's the whole idea.

 

[David Lamb]

-

​

God is life, there is no separating life and God. God did not exist and then one day decide to bring life into existence.

There is no such thing as origin of life, that is a science lie. Sadly that is something Bible believing creationist have adopted as a belief

I agree that God is alive, and so before He began to create, He was the only life. However He did create life "outside" of Himself when He created plants, animals and mankind. I understand that when Christians talk about the origin of life, they are talking of created life, not saying that God had a beginning.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Yes, really.

You can't lock truth behind iron bars.

Nothing of what he's said ever is truthful, correct, accurate or right

 

[d taylor]

I agree that God is alive, and so before He began to create, He was the only life. However He did create life "outside" of Himself when He created plants, animals and mankind. I understand that when Christians talk about the origin of life, they are talking of created life, not saying that God had a beginning.

-
​

God is life, God did not create a separate and different kind of life for these plants animal humans etc.. There is only one kind of life and it come from God. Just ask Ananias and Sapphira who ceased to live immediately, God took His life from them.

 

[AV1611VET]

Nothing of what he's said ever is truthful, correct, accurate or right

Would you know it, if it was?

 

[AV1611VET]

Let's not. There is nothing in science that equates to that. And again, this is the science section.

It's not science though.

You cannot demonstrate abiogenesis, no one has ever seen it occur, and it can't even be defined without vague terminology.

Did you watch the videos?

You cannot scientifically account for the origin of life.

And the term used to fill in this gap -- ("abiogenesis") -- is nothing more than a placeholder text.

As I'm fond of saying:

Only on paper.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Would you know it, if it was?

In general, yes.

In the case of Kent Hovind, Oh yes.

 

[dlamberth]

-
​

I answered your question, being that God is life it should be obvious He is alive.

Sounds like Panenthiesm.