To: CarolinaGuitarman
Okay - so now you're saying Biological Evolution doesn't address the Origin of Life. Gotcha. So - it's the folks who are studying Chemical Evolution that are attempting to address the Origin of Life. I think I have it now.
131 posted on
11/12/2005 10:28:14 AM PST by
Michael_Michaelangelo
(The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory. Lots of links on my homepage...)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
132 posted on
11/12/2005 10:29:37 AM PST by
Michael_Michaelangelo
(The best theory is not ipso facto a good theory. Lots of links on my homepage...)
To: Michael_Michaelangelo
"Okay - so now you're saying Biological Evolution doesn't address the Origin of Life. Gotcha. "
The ToE doesn't deal with the origins of life.
"So - it's the folks who are studying Chemical Evolution that are attempting to address the Origin of Life. I think I have it now."
Chemical Evolution is a not the phrase normally used, it's abiogenesis.
The term evolution is a broad term used in many areas outside of Darwinian, biological concerns. In fact, Darwin didn't call his theory Evolution, he called called it transmutation. People use the term now for things totally unrelated to the ToE, such as when they talk about the evolution of car designs, or of a certain musical style.
The creationist lie is to deliberately mix the different usages of the term *evolution*. The ToE specifically does NOT deal with life's origins. Abiogenesis is the scientific field that does. No matter how many times a creationist is told this, they continue to lie anyway. That's all they have left.
137 posted on
11/12/2005 10:41:48 AM PST by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson