|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Could RNA start life? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
"There has been an interesting new development."
Yes, there always is. And a few years later they all end up on the garbage heap. But they fulfill their PR purpose in the meantime...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Don't get me wrong; I'm not saying that about scientific discoveries in general, which have greatly benefitted our lives and led to better understandings.
I'm talking about this kind of discovery:"The creation of a working protocell which could ALMOST be plausible in a prebiotic environment." TRANSLATION: "Scientists are right on the CUSP of proving abiogenesis true once and for all" These are the 'discoveries' that end up in magazines and newspapers enough to give the public the impression that scientists 'pretty much know' that life originated by natural causes. Of course, it's been my impression that these 'discoveries' fall by the wayside and get forgotten, but by then the newest 'discovery' has taken the spotlight...and so on
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
"My understanding is that the information storage was a by-product."
A by-product of what, if you don't mind rephrasing your second sentence? Sorry, but until I understand what you were saying in the second sentence of your post, I can't really respond to it ![]()
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
"Most scientific work doesn't result in a shiny new edifice of discovery"
I agree. And may I remind you, I have the utmost respect for scientists in general. Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
But where do you think the journalists GET their incessant stories about the 'new discoveries' that all but prove abiogenesis? Do you think the press has moles in the scientific community that steal these 'secrets'?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Okay, you've all made some very good points. I'm glad I brought it up to get your views on the topic of sensationalizing of origin-of-life science, but I grant your main point, so let's get back to the topic, shall we?
Could RNA start life? Of course anything 'could have' happened. But the interesting question is: "Could RNA start life without the assistance of an intelligent designer? Is my question still on the topic?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Razd, you use some strange reasoning:
[qs="RAZD"]Hi dayalanand roy, welcome to the fray.As we know, still majority of evolutionists believe in an RNA world hypothesis. ... Wrong. Many accept that the RNA hypothesis may be true, many are skeptical of it being true and are waiting for more information. ... However, I have a problem in imbibing this theory. ...That would appear to be a personal problem, not a scientific one. Whether or not you accept the theory of gravity has no effect at all on the behavior of gravity.[qs] First, you insist that some scientists are skeptical about the RNA world hypothesis, then you berate the person for his own skepticism. LOL you're funny.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
onifire writes:
Not exactly. Science has to show how the DNA code sequences needed to build life COULD have originated by naturalistic means. And so far it hasn't, though scientists have been trying for over 50 years.
"Could RNA start life without the assistance of an intelligent designer?You'd have to show how it couldn't. For that we'd need to know more about the origin of RNA.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
"Taq" writes: Could RNA start life without the assistance of an intelligent designer?We don't know. However, looking for natural causes for natural phenomena has worked so well in the past that it seems foolish to not look for a natural cause in the case of the origin of life. Good point. But when the search for natural causes gets to the origin of life, it stalls out. There has been no naturalistic answer in the half century since discovering the structure of DNA. The reason is that, at the level of the cell, virtually all of the molecular systems exhibit irreducible complexity, and the code embedded in the DNA sequence is something that can not yet be explained without positing an intelligent designer. Is it possible that intelligence can exist without a living physical body to sustain it?Is it possible that a living physical body can exist without intelligence to design it? There's a bare, logical possibility for both questions; it's just our viewpoint that results in which option you believe to be MORE LIKELY. But without more information than science can provide, there's no basis for committing either way. More information is needed. For the Biological research establishment to admit that, scientifically speaking, there is room in the origin of life for an intelligent designer, would require an admirable example of scientific self-criticism. Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Taq writes: ...even those who claim that there is a designer fail to do any research to test the idea. You don't have to "claim that there is a designer" to do research on the idea. The current research establishment is free to do real research based on Design Theory, it just chooses not to. The Discovery Institute, on the other hand, has a small lab up and running, which took decades to do (as is the norm) and will probably take decades to grow to the point of having enough researchers to 'dig in' to the subject.It's just the pace of science. It'll come. With the full resistance of the current establishment, ID has come a long way scientifically.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Oni writes: So all your work is ahead of you. Good luck.
Thanks. Peace out.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Taq writes: Argument from personal opinion.
Sorry, but a God of the Gaps is the most horrid argument I have ever seen.Taq writes: Religious argument (it's always the atheists who bring up the religious arguments, and they're the first to accuse ID of being religiously motivated! lol).
If there is a God, he has to be insulted by it.Taq writes: Confessions of personal FAITH in the current research program. If we abandonded research that stalled out in the past, we would still be banging rocks together...We tried for hundreds of years to produce machines that flew... Still no responses to my arguments Edited by Ed67, : No reason given. Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
The reason for the resistance from the scientific establishment, and that it hasn't done science from a design perspective, is its commitment to methodological materialism.
Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
ringo writes:
And if so?
Ed67 writes:
There's your problem: If not, the "Intelligent Designer" would have to be an alien lifeform and not some "god". Then who/what designed it?
Is it possible that intelligence can exist without a living physical body to sustain it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ed67 Member (Idle past 3648 days) Posts: 159 Joined: |
Taq writes:
So, do you consider the discovery of a naturalistic explanation for the origin of life inevitable? Now you consider the very act of doing research as having faith. How pathetic. Edited by Ed67, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025