Replies

Evidence of what--? This is an argument of "where life came from"--ultimately, it is most important to those who are trying to prove that a God does not exist, for whatever strange purpose that might serve. There is no believer in God who really has a problem with the factual (rather than the dogmatic) information presented in this article--it is a problem of attitude--it is a matter of obsession to those who continually post Evo threads here in FR.

Relatedness of life is an easy thing for even a Superstitious mind to manage--it's the insistence of "See? I'M RIGHT. IT ALL HAPPENED THIS WAY." Well, that's not acceptable and it is not scientific. You not only do not know how it happened, but you'll likely never know. You'll only see bits and pieces of that whole picture, some of which is illuminating, and some that is just a veil.

I read a good bit of lit in the pharm industry, in which I invest. Evo scientists would do well to learn to qualify their language with a little humility as the writers of new medicines do. Certainly, people who invent life-saving meds do not boast extravagantly of "Creating New Species" when they cannot and have not. Those pharm scientists also run the risk of killing people with their errors--they are accountable--they are not Voodoo Speculators. When you compare the cautious language of those who have to account for their assertions with real lives, you quickly see the difference between a Scientist and a fabricator of fairy tales.