Much as I like turtles (one in particular), with this one I'll go with "God".
Posted on 08/25/2017 7:42:24 AM PDT by Raymond Pamintuan
It has become axiomatic that life naturally evolved out of nonliving materials billions of years ago. Given enough time and the chemical opportunity, living cells self-assemble.
However, the experts on the development of complex molecules from simpler ones, the synthetic chemists, do not know how this process actually occurs. There are no known pathways to create the components that make up a living cell from nonliving matter. They have no idea how amino acids (the building blocks of proteins and enzymes), nucleotides (the building blocks of DNA and RNA), saccharides (also called carbohydrates or sugars, the scaffolding for DNA and RNA, energy sources, and much more), and lipids (the main constituents of cell membranes) can be formed naturally on a prebiotic earth, especially before the formation of biological enzymes, to catalyze many of the requisite chemical reactions.
Life arising naturally out of nonliving materials not only cannot be proven, it contradicts synthetic chemistry’s practices, which comprise of very strict purity and environmental controls as well as experimental and sequential methodology—the exact opposite of what happens in nature—because contamination, water, sunlight, oxygen, heat, and impurities all degrade complex molecules or prevent them from forming.
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
“Given enough time and 100 chimpanzees with 100 typewriters will produce the plays of Shakespeare.”........
The monkeys would all die before succeeding. Based on informed intuition, even a supercomputer would not achieve the result in our lifetime.
I’m quite certain Sagan is not saying those things anymore! One of my college Physics professors used to refer to Carl Sagan as “the public humorist”.
Everyone knows it was "social justice!" [/sarcasm]
Who created the guy on the right? It appears he’s made out of the same material.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Michelangelo. Painting an image of a non-corporal Supreme Being is difficult. I guess he relied on cartoon-logic instead.
Unfortunately, practically every atheist has his cartoon in their heads when they attempt to conceptualize the Creator of the Universe.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
We simply don’t know how abiogenesis occurred. We do have a good idea of the environment, that it was much different than today, and that it only occurred once.
The well respected Christian philosopher, Alvin Plantinga, believes that evolution supports theism more than it supports naturalism.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Evolution is not abiogenesis.
Even the space aliens explanation doesn't really work. Where did they come from? "Panspermia" ends up being "turtles all the way down".
The explanation we have now is tantamount to turtles all the way down, it’s just disguised by all the pseudoscientific flimflam. “Dark matter” is turtles all the way down, too. Turtles every which way you turn. All the way down.
Much as I like turtles (one in particular), with this one I'll go with "God".
Evolution is not abiogenesis.
...
At the root of the Tree of Life is abiogenesis.
God made me to know Him, to love Him, and to serve Him in this world, and to be happy with Him forever in the next.
Abiogenesis is not evolution.
Evolution is not abiogenesis.
One of my fields of specialty is collegiate apparel and I always enjoy doing Maryland. Between the wild state flag and “Testudo” the terrapin, it’s always colorful. Few realize the origin of “Terrapins” as their mascot. It comes from Terra Maria. Maryland was originally a Palatinate created for Catholics.
You must be a lot of fun at parties.
G-d.
>>Forget a complex system like life. Take a jar full of 20 red marbles and 20 blue marbles and empty it on the floor. What are the odds that all the blue marbles end up on one side of the floor and the reds on the other ? In real life terms it will take an astronomical amount of time for it to happen. In other words the odds are zero.
Atoms self assemble due to atomic field forces. Molecules self assemble due to electron valence fields. Proteins self-assemble due to micro resonant EMF fields (optical biophysics). If there is a God involved, he is lawful force via field interaction.
This isn’t random self assembling to form patterns or shapes. We are talking self assembly to fulfil a “purpose” such as to form a circulatory system to pump blood to keep an organism alive. Atoms or molecules lack any such awareness. And it’s practically impossible that they would come together randomly to form an intelligent system that fulfilled a purpose. It’s pure fantasy.
Which is actually what this pro-Creator article argues.
A rose by any other name. Did you read the article? A miracle - seeing as they do occur - is the most reasonable explanation in the light of the astronomical odds against a naturalistic hypotheses.
A miracle would be if abiogenesis occurred in an environment hostile to organic chemistry. For the early Earth the correct answer is we still don’t know how it happened, although there are more plausible explanations than a miracle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.