The story behind Darwin's warm little pond

ARN ^ | November 6, 2009 | David Tyler, Ph.D.

[GodGunsGuts]

Sooner or later, students of abiogenesis will encounter Darwin's 1871 letter to Joseph Hooker with his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life. He was returning some pamphlets which triggered the reaction: "I am always delighted to see a word in favour of Pangenesis, which some day, I believe, will have a resurrection." The next paragraph has his "big if" dream: ...

[editor-surveyor]

He knows, it was his back-up account :o)

[headsonpikes]

Here’s a movie quote for you:

“You’ve got to ask yourself one question: ‘Do I feel lucky?’ Well, do ya, punk?”

[editor-surveyor]

I beg your pardon?

[GodGunsGuts]

LOL!

[editor-surveyor]

Just snikering...

[Avoiding_Sulla]

LOL. I think his aimed that Clint Eastwood line was because you were mouthing off to the admin moderator. You’re a braver man than most is what heads on pikes was suggesting. Thus, I think it was a compliment. As it’s been a dry spell for me, I’d not look too closely at the horse’s mouth and simply accept the gift with a smile. :)

[Avoiding_Sulla]

LOL. I think he aimed that Clint Eastwood line was because you were mouthing off to the admin moderator. You’re a braver man than most is what heads on pikes was suggesting. Thus, I think it was a compliment. As it’s been a dry spell for me, I’d not look too closely at the horse’s mouth and simply accept the gift with a smile. :)

[betty boop]

The edgyness is less justifiable, IMO.

It does make one wonder about the source of said "edgyness."

Here's a rhetorical question: What is it that such "edgy" people have to fear?

[editor-surveyor]

Well, if they’re down to borrowing mods from DU or PMSNBC, what can you do?

I love pokin fun at Chrissie; it gives him a tingle!

[Avoiding_Sulla]

Then you'll prolly love this "with visuals once again by Justin Folk who actually personally decapitated Richard Dawkins to get that shot of his head floating in [Darwin's warm little pond]." :)

[RoadGumby]

Thanks for noticing some of being absent, Buck. Weekends are my time for other pursuits, but I’ll chime in now. I’ve not had enough, nor will I ever ‘be quiet’ about the Lord, His goodness and His Truth.

So many people here mocking God, His works and His Word. Very sad that, as a nation founded in the Judeo-Christian beliefs of moral and responsible freedom, we (collectively, in increasing numbers) turn away from God, replacing Him with ourselves, money, cars, Big Gov’t, etc as the object of our ‘worship’. We prospered as anation because of those values, we have since turned away from them. And we are now beginning to receive the fruits of that refusal.

And all the while wanting to further discredit or discourage the Faith of others. If you want to worship yourselves, do so with all your hearts, fully, to your complete satisfaction. But one day you will face the one that said “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”

I am as willing to marvel at the advances of science as the next person, but not to the exclusion of God or His Word.I would be filled with fear and trembling to point at God and call Him a liar.

[RoadGumby]

Again, tearing at the Faith of others.

Do you consider yourself nothing more than the misguided offspring of some mutated sub primate, therefore not a product of a loving creator?

[RoadGumby]

What did GGG misrepresent about the Bible?

[editor-surveyor]

We have lots of irreverant reverance here!

[YHAOS]

”Here's a rhetorical question: What is it that such "edgy" people have to fear?”

Rhetorical? OK, rhetorically, it is knowledge that they have to fear. Specifically, the knowledge of good and evil. Topsy spoke from ignorance when she said she didn’t think “nobody never made me.” Those in our society who claim today that they are quite certain that “nobody never made me,” unlike Topsy, have possession of a wider range of knowledge. Somewhere in there resides, I think, the actual meaning of the story of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. And, since we are speaking rhetorically without the benefit of the multiple nuances in which Sophists so love to indulge, we might do well to also recognize that there is a difference between knowledge and the possession of information.

[Buck W.]

If you condider asking a question to be “tearing at the faith of other”, then we really don’t have much of any importance to exchange.

I stand by my earlier post to you, though, that based on our correspondence to date, I have a lot more respect for you than I do for the phonies that inhabit and post on these threads. Your position is based on faith, any you have not yet rationalized that faith by claiming that science supports it.

I, too, am a Christian. We just see things differently.

[Buck W.]

I wasn’t referring to you. I don’t consider you one of the groupies.

[RoadGumby]

“What I value is straight science without the propaganda as in evolution or Darwin’s nonsense...”

Do you consider biblical creationism to be real science?

Why the use of 'real' as though that persons desire to have 'straight science...' is errant if it were to include the idea that something scientific might support the idea of creation in a biblical context?

My position is indeed based on Faith, and I will bolster my position using facts that are presented scientifically, as well as continue to protest the attempt to discredit the Bible, as well as to oppose, as non-confrontationally as possible, those who attempt that discrediting.

While there are many warm little ponds, it is mind boggling to think that random collisions between non-living molecules slowly made them more complex in a VERY SPECIFIC way to allow them to feed and reproduce as a single unit.

Then, somehow, that pond scum rears itself out of that soup and treads the earth, changing forms, gaining complexity (Against the 2nd Law of Thermo) until today, here we are, the crowning glory of a cosmic game of chance.

How can a Christian reconcile his being an 'image of God' and at the same time profess that he is a direct descendant of warm pond scum?

[Buck W.]

Consider “real” to be synonymous with the poster’s use of “straight”. Do you still object?

[RoadGumby]

I guess the problem I have is that one who subscribes to the evolution Theory blidly discounts anything else. But then, in the same breath, decries that one who refutes that Theory and claims to stand on Faith, and the evidence that supports it gets their support information from sites that are pro-creation.

There is a school of thought called Creation Science. I see no problem or conflict with calling it such. Science that supports the idea of Creationism.

As a Christian, one SHOULD be looking for evidence that the Bible is correct, not seeking to discredit it.

As a Christian, I believe that, not only did Jesus bring the dead to life, but was Himself resurrected, DESPITE the FACT that science would tell us that a body, being dead 3 days cannot be brought back to life.

As a Christian, I believe that, not only did Jesus walk on water, but Peter did too, DESPITE science telling me that just isn’t possible, surface tension and all that.

AND Science may try to explain that man evolved from some small worm-like animal, but again, I would profess my belief that we were created in the likeness of God, as per Genesis.