No Witnesses

ookuay writes: No one was present when life first appeared on earth. Therefore, any statement about life's origins should be considered as theory, not fact." ~Alabama State Board of Education

ookuay writes: Are witnesses really necessary to count evolution as a legitimate theory?

Perdition writes: The thing is, we're not even willing to give it the status of theory, because theory is a pretty strong statement. It means that it satisfies all evidence and is so compelling that we grant it the tentative status of "best explanation we've come up with yet."

Perdition writes: The point is, life can evolve regardless of what its origins are. It could have been poofed into existence by God, it could have evolved from non-life, it could have been planted by aliens, etc. Once it got started, though, it has evolved.

Coyote writes: How would you see the theory of evolution differing with the following possible origins of life? a. Some deity poofed life into existence. b. Some space aliens dropped the starting blocks of life here. c. Life began from organic chemicals, whether from here or outer space. d. Life was transferred here by time travelers from the future. e. Other. Please specify how (and why) evolution would have to be configured differently under each of these scenarios.

Dr. Adequate writes: First, it should read "hypothesis, not theory" instead of "theory, not fact". 'Cos we wouldn't want to be scientifically illiterate morons, would we?

Dr Adequate writes: Second, this does not apply to any statement. For example, some people believe that God poofed life into existence about six thousand years ago. This is known to be false, since life is in fact older than this. Not every hypothesis is on the same level of ignorance. Some of them are just wrong, and known to be wrong.So to be accurate we would have to say: "All hypotheses about the origin of life are unproven, and so should not be regarded as theories. However, at least some of them have been conclusively disproven, such as literal belief in the Book of Genesis, which from a scientific point of view must be regarded as a steaming pile of crap."

Tangle writes: Knowing an origin, doesn't, of course, affect anything about what happens next. If a baby is left on the church steps, with a note saying 'please look after my child,' we can expect it to grow even if we don't know how it got there.Just out of interest, when science has an answer, what will your new reply be?

NoNukes writes: Frankly, our scientific speculation regarding the origins of life are less than theory, and perhaps less than hypothesis. But what we know about the origin of species is far more substantial, and given the direct contradiction of the origin of species with Genesis, guess what doesn't get taught in science class.

Coyote writes: How could you tell? What is the evidence for evolution being planned?

subbie writes: Given that you don't recognize or understand the answers that science has already supplied, I hope you'll forgive me if I don't count on you further developments. But thanks anyway.

tangle writes: It's always best to rehearse - you don't want to be caught wrong footed. There's a lot happening in the microbiology labs now you know.

jar writes: We do know that there is evidence of natural causes.
We also know that no one has ever presented any evidence of any non-natural or supernatural causes.

subbie writes: How wonderful for you. You claim that one person says you understand one concept pretty well. On the other hand, most everything I've seen you write here indicates you don't understand the first thing about how science works, or what the ToE says.

Tangle writes: And then you will, of course, simply deny it. After all, if you can just flatly deny 150 years of evidence and facts in several scientific disciplines that proves that complex life evolved from simpler life over millions of years, what chance does a new major discovery like abiogenesis in your own lifetime stand?

Dr Adequate writes: Consider this: the proposition that things happen according to natural law and not by God doing magic is the best supported theory in science. Every experiment ever done, every observation ever made, supports this propositionhappened.