Replies

Is this your evidence? That the origin of life is studied at all is what links it to the theory of evolution?

It’s my question: Why is science studying the origin of life at all? Aren’t such studies pointless, scientifically speaking? It’s my understanding origins is properly a subject for study by theology or philosophy, Science being a materialistic discipline, unable to make meaningful judgments about other things. That’s true isn’t it? Can I get a straight answer to an uncomplicated question? If you need to qualify or equivocate a little bit, please feel free - I won’t accuse you of lying.

The story is appearing all over; it’s in the Sidney World Herald, in the UK Guardian, in the Houston Chronicle, USA Today, CNN, and many others, I’m sure. The Boston Globe has the biggest article, and a lot of the others seem to have based their report on the Globe version.

The Boston Globe

Project on the origins of life launched

Harvard joining debate on evolution

By Gareth Cook, Globe Staff

http://www.boston.com/news/education/higher/articles/2005/08/14/project_on_the_origins_

On what do you base this? A USA Today article?

Can’t trust them papers, huh? Well, here’s your chance to set the record straight. You have the name of the reporter, so you can email the bovine scatological ignoramus, and his equally mentally retarded editor, and square them both away on the gratuitous addition of material potentially embarrassing to the Science Community, or their failure to edit out some of the more careless statements made by scientists. You have such an enchanting manner about you when you are correcting others’ errors, that almost assuredly they (the editor and the reporter) will be charmed into a response, confessing who it was that screwed up in leaving too many dots around to be connected.

Personally, I think the articles are probably accurate. You have to remember who MSM pukes cuddle up to, and who they scorn and shun. Imagine their elation when they were told that it’s just a matter of a few years and the existence of God will be definitively disproved, and that it will be known authoritatively that we all came from a mud puddle. This would just be too good of news not to be passed on largely unretouched. It is IDers, other ‘Bible-thumpers’ and ‘Jesus-freaks’, and knuckle-dragging conservatives generally, who are greeted with hostility and disdain, and whose stories are spiked or distorted.

Why is science studying the origin of life at all?

The same reason scientists studies anything: better insight into the workings of the universe.

Aren’t such studies pointless, scientifically speaking?

Scientifically speaking, studying anything is "pointless". Science is a methodology. Motives behind scientific study are not themselves science. Science does not define purpose, it simply explains how the universe works.

It’s my understanding origins is properly a subject for study by theology or philosophy,

Theology and philosophy can certainly address the matter of origins, but that doesn't mean that science can't investigate the matter. Theology and philosophy can try to examine gravity, but that doesn't mean that relativity theory isn't science.

Science being a materialistic discipline, unable to make meaningful judgments about other things. That’s true isn’t it?

Yes. What has that to do with studying the origin of the first life forms?

Can’t trust them papers, huh?

A newspaper to give an accurate description of the scope of a scientific theory? No. Many people mistakenly believe that the theory of evolution directly addresses the ultimate origin of life. That doesn't make it true, but it also doesn't surprise me to see a reporter who has no discernable science background making that mistake in an article.

Personally, I think the articles are probably accurate.

On what basis?

You have to remember who MSM pukes cuddle up to, and who they scorn and shun.

What does that have to do with the actual scope of the theory of evolution?

Imagine their elation when they were told that it’s just a matter of a few years and the existence of God will be definitively disproved, and that it will be known authoritatively that we all came from a mud puddle.

Who in the hell told thim this? I've never heard anyone claim that we're anywhere close to demonstrating that the latter is true, and science could never, ever, do the former. Anyone who claims that science could disprove God is a liar or a moron.

This would just be too good of news not to be passed on largely unretouched.

I think that you're reading into this things that are simply not there. Harvard is doing a study on life origins. Many people mistakenly think that life origins is part of the theory of evolution. The theory of evolution has recently come under attack by a group of hacks pushing "Intelligent Design", thus from a study on origins we get an article mentioning the evolution vs. ID issue. I don't see how this is the fault of Harvard, nor do I see how this logically demonstrates that life origins actually is part of the theory of evolution.