Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom
We could start with the fact that nobody KNOWS what conditions were like when life allegedly arose and nobody knows what the mechanism was that caused the first molecules to form and remain.

How does that disprove the theory? If we knew those things, there wouldn't be any need to theorize about them. You seem to be expecting to establish a Catch-22 that says you can't theorize until you already know.

48 posted on 02/22/2010 3:08:53 PM PST by tacticalogic ("Oh bother!" said Pooh, as he chambered his last round.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]


To: tacticalogic; metmom

The evolutionists elevate their theory’s and worship them as reality. What I say to them is just dont expect everyone else to.


49 posted on 02/22/2010 3:27:44 PM PST by valkyry1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

To: tacticalogic

Next is that the whole origins consideration isn’t science to begin with.

It’s philosophy.

Nobody was there to observe it. It can’t be tested on. It hasn’t been repeatable.

Assembling molecules in the lab qualifies as science, but is not terribly relevant to the origins debate.

Nobody knows for sure what conditions were like. They’re presumed based on what scientists think they needed to be in order for x,y,z to happen.

That’s not science, that’s guessing.


57 posted on 02/22/2010 4:08:26 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson