Issues with Origin, Part 1: The Suddenness of Life

[PerpetualYnquisitive]

"Given the weaknesses of all theories of terrestrial genesis, directed panspermia [deliberate planting of life on earth] should still be considered a serious possibility." Francis H. C. Crick

 

Taking the above statement into account, 2 facts can be established; 1)evolution, like the flat earth theory is highly improbable and 2) if evolution has weaknesses then the panspermia is even worse off, for how can you really believe evolution worked on some other unknown, unresearched planet? the 'intelligence' to seed the earth would have had to come from someplace. Talk about blind faith.

 

 

You can question divinity but you cannot disprove that it exists.

[Radical Edward]

"Given the weaknesses of all theories of terrestrial genesis' date=' directed panspermia [deliberate planting of life on earth'] should still be considered a serious possibility." Francis H. C. Crick

 

Every mention of that quote I find comes from a creationist book by Schroeder (who is a physicist I might add - not exactly qualified to discuss origins, but lets not get into an argument from authority here)

 

so that in mind, how old is this quote? The reason I ask, is that there is an awful lot of evidence for abiogenesis now, in that a number of the processes we know to be required in abiogenesis models have been observed. and most likely, observed since that particular quote was made.

[Sayonara]

I'd hardly say that those facts logically or necessarily follow the quote in any case.

[Radical Edward]

exactly. the quote refers to abiogenesis and the "facts" criticise "evolution". The first "fact" is completely baseless and the 2nd again criticises abiogenesis, while calling it evolution.

[admiral_ju00]

You can question divinity but you cannot disprove that it exists.

 

nor can you Prove it, not a single bit of it! and that's blind faith in my book. or better yet, a human weakness. when faced with an inability to explain a certain physical phenomenon, it is dismissed as flawed and the answer is found in a form of a 'magic bullit' in this case the religion as it has all the anwers.

[NavajoEverclear]

Amen. Choose what you believe, but get over trying to proove it. Do you believe in faith? If you do you will stop trying, or caring to proove anything. Proove to me you aren't dreaming, proove to me you aren't a computer program. You can choose to believe that you are or are not, but there is no way to logically proove it. Some people think that proof comes in the probability or improbibility, but you really cant proove that either. Of coarse you should have reasons for what you choose to believe, but if you feel you have to MAKE others see it as you do, your reasons are probably not genuine.

 

back on the subject---- the universe is so huge that probabilites become inevitable. Consider this one : how many of instances of life exist in the enourmous universe? There are certainly many many just by possibility and probability---- you'd have to have either a lot of faith or a lot of stupidity to say there isn't lots of life besides us. . . . . as we progress, evolve, advance, we gain more power. The technology of today would be considered magic just a century ago. Of coarse there are also many problems stemming from this power--- which may result in us blowing ourselves up---- but there are those other possiblitities. It is inevitable that one organism may gain enough power to be called God. Since this would be many levels beyond us we cannot understand what that would entail. I actually don't choose to believe in that exact possibility, just trying to make a point, or something, as if it matters.

 

Please stop preaching, it isn't working.