ScottySatan
Well-Known Member
To deny abiogenesis when you argue against creationists makes the scientific viewpoint look a lot worse than it really is. Anyone smart who thinks about evolution will come to the question of abiogenesis naturally. Where did we come from? Where did our ancestors come from? Where did their ancestors come from? Oh, it boils down to a single celled organism? Well, I guess that answers all my questions and I'll stop my investigation right there, no need to think about where those things came from, right? Does that make sense to you? **** no!
Biologists study abiogenesis. Some are in the department of biochemistry, but where are most? The evolutionary science department. In what journals do they publish? Evolutionary science journals. Which conferences do they attend? Evolutionary science conferences.
WHY? Because cells are believed to have formed out of spontaneous generation of order that is well known in physics (Micelles, etc.). Hereditary molecules are believed to come from inorganic materials like clay (RNA world hypothesis). The first inorganic molecule to crudely copy itself (we do observe a level of self replication at about the level of crudeness and inefficiency that we would expect in a prebiotic world, today. See prions), did so on accident, and the child molecules that were better at this went faster via natural selection. If you don't think inorganic molecules can replicate or pass on information, look up the propagation reactions of free radicals. Abiogenesis is very chemical in nature, but noble laymen who like to argue for us don't understand that modern evolution is equally chemical.
In the future, please do us a favor by admitting that you don't know enough chemistry or enough about abiogenesis in general to make arguments about this very relevant branch of evolutionary science, but point out to them that it does exist, that there are books on the subject, and maybe you can check one out yourself.
Biologists study abiogenesis. Some are in the department of biochemistry, but where are most? The evolutionary science department. In what journals do they publish? Evolutionary science journals. Which conferences do they attend? Evolutionary science conferences.
WHY? Because cells are believed to have formed out of spontaneous generation of order that is well known in physics (Micelles, etc.). Hereditary molecules are believed to come from inorganic materials like clay (RNA world hypothesis). The first inorganic molecule to crudely copy itself (we do observe a level of self replication at about the level of crudeness and inefficiency that we would expect in a prebiotic world, today. See prions), did so on accident, and the child molecules that were better at this went faster via natural selection. If you don't think inorganic molecules can replicate or pass on information, look up the propagation reactions of free radicals. Abiogenesis is very chemical in nature, but noble laymen who like to argue for us don't understand that modern evolution is equally chemical.
In the future, please do us a favor by admitting that you don't know enough chemistry or enough about abiogenesis in general to make arguments about this very relevant branch of evolutionary science, but point out to them that it does exist, that there are books on the subject, and maybe you can check one out yourself.
Last edited:
