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.
The amount of scientific ignorance in this thread is astounding. Eggs were around long before chickens. Chickens were not the first animals to produce eggs. There were animals that produced eggs around long before chickens. Such as fish, invertebrates, amphibians and reptiles.
Technically nothing is "indisputable"... but how justified the dispute is varies.
Flat Earthers think that "Well, I can't see the curve." is a reasonable counter top the shape is the Earth... but very few people take them seriously.
Physics and geology explain a vast amount of inter connected evidence both on and off the Earth, so the old ages are reasonable conclusions to come to.
I disagree.Intelligent design is a reasonable conclusion to come to as well.
I disagree.
The intelligent design movement uses several logically flawed ideas:
Assuming the designer and requiring opposition to disprove it;
Claims of irreducible complexity without acknowledging scaffolding or changes in function;
Arguments referring to changes in genetic information without any objective method of measuring the quantity of such.
Which is of course a complete straw man, since the chicken and egg argument is either specific or generic. Your response is an
“ astounding “ (sic) illogical mix of the two.
So if you would kindly answer either the specific question:
Ie - which came first a chicken or a ( clearly meant )”hens” egg
, or instead the generic question - which came first the organism that produces eggs to reproduce, or the organism.
You would then be producing a logical , and so useful, response.
so if you would prefer to answer the LOGICAL question begged but use one of your examples , feel free. Eg Which came first the dinosaur or dinosaurs egg?
Not sure these issues belong here.
Indeed have been aired elsewhere,
Intelligent design can neither be proven NOR disproven.
The designer does not leave an indelible trace of necessity.
Simple designed examples can prove it. Eg man designed crystal structures.
Only semantically.Irreducible complexity can be proven with reference to a specific function. The definition of minimum “life” is such a function.
No, it did NOT say "hen's egg", it just said "egg."
Stop trying to weasel out of things.
However the processes of geology and cosmology do leave traces... and we can and have observed them in the physical world.
Potentially provide evidence, prove is more difficult when dealing with unknown or unknowable processes.
Only semantically.
There isn't a clear difference between the chemistry that makes up living processes and the chemistry that makes up debatable elements like viruses and prions or the chemistry that makes up non living organic chemistry.
Meanwhile - in the world of science , and logic , context is everything.
The devil is in the detail.
if you actually READ the Original post, regardless of what you think of it , the context is parent and child. So your reply is therefore manifest nonsense!
There is when using. the working definitions of life used in OOL research. In which self sustaining, reproducing and capable of Darwinian evolution are the prominent parts.
The latter requires a genome. A genome is information. Information has a minimum information theoretic encryption size. So it is irreducibly complex. QED.
A hydrogen molecule isn’t live, it doesn’t have enough complexity to cater for all the life functions.
The biggest problem for the conjecture of chemical origin of life is consciousness, which is increasing evidence demonstrates is not a function of the brain. The OP alludes to this type of aspect in the narrative , but not in the question polled.
This thread is probably the wrong place to air these issues.
There is a big difference to consciousness being linked to the chemical & physical properties/actions of a brain and to it being caused by those same things. Here is an interesting short video.Interesting claim... but not supported by the many ways in which consciousness is demonstrably linked to chemical and physical action on the brain.
Interesting claim... but not supported by the many ways in which consciousness is demonstrably linked to chemical and physical action on the brain.
So called out of body evidences have never been objectively supported.
.
There is a big difference to consciousness being linked to the chemical & physical properties/actions of a brain and to it being caused by those same things. Here is an interesting short video.
Not sure how we got to "consciousness" in yet another thread (and one where there is not connection), but the "case" presented in this video was nothing more than metaphysical wishcasting. The subject of the interview needs to swap out the mushrooms on his pizza.
How about this one:Not sure how we got to "consciousness" in yet another thread (and one where there is not connection), but the "case" presented in this video was nothing more than metaphysical wishcasting. The subject of the interview needs to swap out the mushrooms on his pizza.
How about this one:
That channel on youtube has many interesting videos, not all on consciousness.
Its on the thumbnail ' Closer to Truth'
I can read the logo, but I have no idea what the channel is about. What is it's viewpoint (if it has one)? etc.
No of course not, just a bunch of eminent scientists talking, the people you put your faith in. Its worth watching a few of the videos to judge for yourself.If the name of a website, YouTube channel, etc has the word "TRUTH" in the title, then I can pretty much guarantee you won't find any truth in the contents.
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?