abiogenesis and the orgin of life (moral, Earth, atheist, Almighty)

[robtex]

Abiogenesis is a theory yet to be proven and is the primary reason why I hold the theory of God in my head. We know from biology and genetics that RNA is the strongest theroy on the origin of life and in the end it comes down to one question.

RNA (aka the orgin of life) was self-spawned from non-life or it was not. If it was abiogenesis is correct and there is no God. If is is not than it had to be inspired by something outside of that which was first life which is a variation on St Thomas Aquinas's first mover arguement.

I throw this out here cause I want to know if:

1) how far abiogenesis has gone to prove the existance of life (ie level of validity with current knowledge)

2) if RNA is (as I understand it ) the current strongest theory of the orgin of life

3) If in the estimation of others on this forum that is the strongest question to be answer as to if there is a divine presense or not in the universe.

footnote resources
for abiogenesis and rna theory and St Tom's 5 arguements (wikidepida)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_page

than use search to find summary of each.

[linwood]

Remember, I`m no expert

1) how far abiogenesis has gone to prove the existance of life (ie level of validity with current knowledge)

The study of abiogenesis has created from amino acids the proteins necessary to build life.
It has also determined that it is possible there was help from extraterristrial sources.
Asteroids have been found carrying amino acids from other galaxies.

2) if RNA is (as I understand it ) the current strongest theory of the orgin of life

I believe it is.
Scientists have recently gotten a natural strand of DNA to accept RNA created in a petri dish.
All that is left is to find how to get RNA to duplicate in this setting.

3) If in the estimation of others on this forum that is the strongest question to be answer as to if there is a divine presense or not in the universe.

I don`t believe so.
Even if there is a divine prescense it`s obvious he/she/it has no interest in this part of the universe.

The divinity really doesn`t matter to me.

[painted wolf]

Prions are naturally forming protiens that are precursers to life. They form from natually occuring Amino Acids and have the ability to mutate and reproduce without being 'alive'.
They are the best 'natural' proof of abiogenisis.

That being said, Abiogenisis says nothing about the nature of god. It simply shows that life can form from the materials avalible on this planet. It is left to the individual to decide if 'God' set the system up that way.

wa:do

[Mr Spinkles]

robtex-- Two things:

1) As painted wolf said, abiogenesis says nothing about the existence of any gods. If abiogenesis were proven correct, it would prove that life can form from a mindless, natural process. It will not disprove, however, the existence of a supernatural being with a mind who put this process in motion.

2) What exactly is this "theory of God" that you hold in your head? Does God have consciousness, morality, feelings, almighty power, and/or some sort of plan for humanity? If so, how do you derive these traits from your initial proposition that God must be equivalent to "that which caused the first life on Earth"?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by Mr_Spinkles

2) What exactly is this "theory of God" that you hold in your head? Does God have consciousness, morality, feelings, almighty power, and/or some sort of plan for humanity? If so, how do you derive these traits from your initial proposition that God must be equivalent to "that which caused the first life on Earth"?

Precisely.

[robtex]

Originally Posted by Mr_Spinkles

robtex-- Two things:

1) As painted wolf said, abiogenesis says nothing about the existence of any gods. If abiogenesis were proven correct, it would prove that life can form from a mindless, natural process. It will not disprove, however, the existence of a supernatural being with a mind who put this process in motion.

2) What exactly is this "theory of God" that you hold in your head? Does God have consciousness, morality, feelings, almighty power, and/or some sort of plan for humanity? If so, how do you derive these traits from your initial proposition that God must be equivalent to "that which caused the first life on Earth"?

1) I can see that strong point. Couldn't imagine why there would be a God if life self spawned from non life though. Everything about nature and the universe seems to have a purpose and I sometimes think if God's purpose wasn't to create and nothing else has been positivly attributed to him than how could an enity without a purpose exist?

2) Theory of God=one who created life. No plan, morality or feelings has seemed to have discovered only a paradign of balancing factors between motion space gender and life on earth. Nature is an equation isn't it? Some sorta giant mathimatical function where their are more constants than variables and change is moderate but consistant.

Delving God that which caused life comes down to RNA .....either life came from nonlife or life came from God. If life came from nothing than it would be the only example where this happened one time.....a standard deviation in the puzzle. Which made me think of the abiogenesis. Obviously abiogenesis which has been attempted for a while by the science community which is largely atheist (as you have pointed out and non baisis in nature) is complexed tricky undoeable or inprobably but it happpened .....once......Makes me think it is divine as opposed to the standard deviation in the equation.

I keep seeing St Thomas's first mover arugement over and over....either the universe created itself or God created it. If it created itself.....why only one? standard deviation (to the norm) or divine intervention?

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by robtex

I keep seeing St Thomas's first mover arugement over and over....either the universe created itself or God created it. If it created itself.....why only one? standard deviation (to the norm) or divine intervention?

First:

1. Drop the "standard deviation" stuff. It has no relevance.
2. Note the use of divine instead of 'supernatural'.

Let's play a game. Let's say that there exists (if that is the appropriate word) something that transcends nature as we know it. To avoid judgement-laden terms, let's call it the Metaverse. Now, let me suggest two equally unevidenced and unfalsifiable 'hypotheticals':

• Some occurrence (call them blips) somewhat akin to quantum fluctuations, results in the instantiation of a 'universe'.
• Divine (and purposeful) intervention.

On what grounds do you select #2 and create, not only a universe, but also a teleology?

[painted wolf]

you are assuming it only happined once. It may have happined several times and one of a few things happined.
1)the various early cells combined to form new ones.
2)Viruses and the first Cells may not all have formed from the same 'moment' of creation. Proteinoids certenly don't as they form spontaniously to this day. Prions may also form spontaniously from inorganic material or eaven from Proteinoids.
2)whole linages of early cells died off leaving no decendants. This is reasonable as lineages have died out before and left no decendants. It also may have been quite common as the environments of the earth changed. Puddles dry out, rocks get covered with lava and so on.

Who knows how many times life formed in the early Earth only to be wiped out by chance.
Who knows how many times this is going on all over the Univerce? Amino acids are commonly found in deep space all it takes is having the right conditions.

Again Scientific theories say nothing about the existance/or lack there of, of 'God'. Perhaps your definition of 'god' should be "the thing that wrote the equasion", if the equasion lead to life so much the better.

wa:do