DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
Agreed. Don't know why I even bother. I just can't help it to try and help somebody in need.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: What's the most interesting small town you've visited in South Africa?
Rejecting evolution with science...
- Thread starter DJ...
- Start date
Agreed. Don't know why I even bother. I just can't help it to try and help somebody in need.
Eager Chinchilla
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2013
- Messages
- 230
- Reaction score
- 0
I know that this has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution, but has the emergence of life from non-living matter ever been observed?
We had a discussion about this the other day at work.
We had a discussion about this the other day at work.
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
No, only certain "building blocks" have been synthesized in labs. It would be quite a huge deal if scientists were able to create life from inorganic matter, but they have created artificial cells from existing cells using synthesized dna (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703559004575256470152341984.html).
HapticSimian
Honorary Master
I commend you for the bold bit. As for the rest, I can't gauge whether you're being serious or facetious. If the former, perhaps you might've heard about it had it been observed? It'd be pretty big news, akin to finding poodles on Mars.
If you were to consider the question honestly, how surprising is it truly that our kids don't yet have create-your-own-pet sets? You're talking about something that happened a couple of thousand million years ago, in conditions we might never replicate accurately. What has however been observed is the emergence of organic compounds from inorganic matter.
But as you rightly say, whether the mystery of the emergence of life is ever solved is utterly irrelevant to evolutionary theory.
Abiogenesis hasn't been replicated under scientific conditions, not because it can't be, but because we have no way of knowing the exact conditions on earth at that point in time, and marginal pH differences for example will have a significant impact. And considering the massive number of combinations, it is not plausible to expect that all conditions be tested and that all conditions have a positive result.
Best we can realistically do is run simulations through supercomputers and that is ongoing. There are physical experiments being conducted but they're really a shot in the dark for the time being...
Eager Chinchilla
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2013
- Messages
- 230
- Reaction score
- 0
Oh dear, so I should rather not discuss abiogenesis in the context of evolution then?
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
Why would you want to in the first place?
HapticSimian
Honorary Master
What context do you perceive there to be?
Perhaps not in the context of biological evolution or the Theory of Evolution. Abiogenesis is nonetheless a form of evolution/change as it is a process whereby changes in non-living substances over time resulted in the beginning of living substances. It can arguably be also cashed out in terms of differences in fitness over time similar to what is observed in biological evolution.
The two are completely unrelated, in the same way as you wouldn't discuss gravity and AIDS...
I wouldn't go so far seeing that there are similarities. Biological evolution and abiogenesis are both examples of evolution/change. And, as mentioned, abiogenesis can make use of terms normally associated with the Theory of evolution. The major difference is just that the Theory of evolution deals with biological evolution and abiogenesis deals with the evolution of non-living substances to living substances.
Eager Chinchilla
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2013
- Messages
- 230
- Reaction score
- 0
Thanks, its pretty interesting.
abandonallhope
Expert Member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 3,384
- Reaction score
- 7
What on earth gave you the impression that I have any remote inclination to engage with you (and your cheerleaders) in a serious and earnest discussion on really important and profound issues like where we came from etc ?
DrJohnZoidberg
Honorary Master
It's weird, can only find one thread on abiogenesis and it's been closed. It was started by a loon though.
!
HapticSimian
Honorary Master
Just how many identities have you had on here?!
It does seem that every iteration seems a bit less loony and testy than the last. Couple more nicks and you'll come join us on this side of the fence; the right side.
It might have something to do with you injecting yourself into these discussions and making claims akin to the thread title. So far you have proved yourself wholly incapable of engaging in serious, earnest, profound discussion in any way whatsoever. Seems all you're capable of is one-liners before what I can only assume is severe ADD that kicks in...
Poor Techne...
Last edited:
I think I am more on the right side as you appear to be more on the left sideJust how many identities have you had on here?!
It does seem that every iteration seems a bit less loony and testy than the last. Couple more nicks and you'll come join us on this side of the fence; the right side.
? Maybe you have a different meaning for "right".... Language matters 
.Btw, have you seen the "moving naturalism forward" sessions? Fascinating stuff!
Last edited:
HapticSimian
Honorary Master
I think I am more on the right side as you appear to be more on the left side
Touché, old bean. I'm sure you were as convinced of your being [-]right[/-] correct in each of your prior... erm... phases. I do hope you're still around in oh, 10 or 20 years, so I can satiate my curiosity as to whether my prediction will ultimately be borne out.
Ditto
Touché, old bean. I'm sure you were as convinced of your being [-]right[/-] correct in each of your prior... erm... phases. I do hope you're still around in oh, 10 or 20 years, so I can satiate my curiosity as to whether my prediction will ultimately be borne out.
.