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

To: Rachumlakenschlaff
That's not to say experiments aren't done, it's just that they generally don't prove anything.

Any experiment can only provide another fact. At the pure convenience of creation science, any theory which tries to tie one fact to another is just "conjecture."

Well, what is left out are things like the amino acids formed were both right- and left-handed and that left-handed amino acids are the only ones used in proteins in living organisms. Also, the equilibrium for the reactions to produce the amino acids lies way over towards the starting ingredients, not the end products, and that the only way significant yield was obtained was by the removal of the amino acids as they were being formed.

Or, you could just say, "It didn't make a horseshoe crab." That would be shorter.

These experiments are hardly convincing experimental evidence of the abiogenesis of life.

But what step is supposed to be impossible? 400K years after the Big Bang we had mostly hydrogen, some helium, and a little lithium in a very even gas. We've gone from there to a rocky planet with some amino acids in water solution. Is an amino acid more complex than a helium atom? Is it impossible that anything more complicated will ever form now? If so, why? If not, is it impossible to form some simple self-replicator molecule? If so, why? If not, where is the barrier?

1,402 posted on 03/06/2003 9:01:23 AM PST by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1398 | View Replies ]


To: VadeRetro
But what step is supposed to be impossible? 400K years after the Big Bang we had mostly hydrogen, some helium, and a little lithium in a very even gas. We've gone from there to a rocky planet with some amino acids in water solution. Is an amino acid more complex than a helium atom? Is it impossible that anything more complicated will ever form now? If so, why? If not, is it impossible to form some simple self-replicator molecule? If so, why? If not, where is the barrier?


Your argument seems to be, "The fact that we exist proves evolution". Or, "We started with simple things, now we have complex things. Evolution is therefore proven." Why are creationists obliged to prove the impossibility of something happening and you are not obliged to prove that it did happen or show that it can happen? Can you prove that God doesn't exist?
1,410 posted on 03/06/2003 9:39:21 AM PST by Rachumlakenschlaff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1402 | 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