Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
It is my view on the topic, the improbability that something complex as life can spontaneously pop into existence. But I'm listening, even though I might disagree with you...officer.
Okay... I will play. Are we missing some component of life that prevents us from repeating the process? A protocell?
I wish I believed you were "listening". Generally, creationists try as hard as they can to block their ears.It is my view on the topic, the improbability that something complex as life can spontaneously pop into existence. But I'm listening, even though I might disagree with you...officer.
Okay... I will play. Are we missing some component of life that prevents us from repeating the process? A protocell?
I enjoy all the good things science has brought to my table, but it is not my religion. Granted, religions of this world have done some harm in their path, but I award science with the worst possible evil on this planet, 3000+ nuclear warheads sitting on rockets waiting for the order to destroy millions of worlds. If you find my blasphemy disturbing, so be it. Science is nothing more than a tool for good or evil, imo.
Oh, so it's not by chance then. Are you a believer?
Can you answer the question please? Do you now understand what natural selection is?
How did I misrepresent your conclusions? Science dictates that life appeared from the elements of Earth. The analogy is correct as far as I'm concerned.
It's late. Perhaps I will read the authoritative BBc link later.
Science dictates that life appeared from the elements of Earth. The analogy is correct as far as I'm concerned.
I bet you never read it.
The following summary from evolutionary hypotheses in anthropology is from Eliezer Yudkowsky:
If you're saying "intelligent design" is antiscience, then you're agreeing with (among a great deal else) the decision in the Dover case 2005.
We are "missing" millions of years. It is hard to run an experiment in a lab that likely took millions of years. Right now we can reproduce some of the necessary steps, but not all of them.It is my view on the topic, the improbability that something complex as life can spontaneously pop into existence. But I'm listening, even though I might disagree with you...officer.
Okay... I will play. Are we missing some component of life that prevents us from repeating the process? A protocell?
Oh wait . . . are you opposed to evolution? Evolution is a fact. You as much as admitted it when you debated the concept of abiogenesis.
Life spontaneously popping into existence is religion.It is my view on the topic, the improbability that something complex as life can spontaneously pop into existence. But I'm listening, even though I might disagree with you...officer.
Not following. Are you asking why abiogenesis can't occur today?
Science is hardly a religion. It's just the research method that provides the most reliable understanding of how things work.
And what does religion propose?How did I misrepresent your conclusions? Science dictates that life appeared from the elements of Earth. The analogy is correct as far as I'm concerned.
There is a doctor who hosts the youtube channel 'chubbyemu' who regularly explains medical things. He does one video on a body part called the 'Recurrent laryingeal nerve' which he says is strong evidence for blind evolution. This nerve seems badly designed making a long u-turn in the neck, going all the way down into the chest, around the aorta of the heart, then back up towards the chin again. In Giraffes it can be many meters long. It could be much shorter and do the same job or better.
How did I misrepresent your conclusions? Science dictates that life appeared from the elements of Earth. The analogy is correct as far as I'm concerned.
