The Origin of Specious Nonsense. Twelve years on. Still going. Answer soon.

obplayer wrote: »

Could I ask where you studied please?

I'm pleading the 5th Amendment on that one!!:)

J C wrote: »

I'm pleading the 5th Amendment on that one!!:)

Figures!

Was it somewhere in Texas?

Jernal wrote:

No we believe you haven't the slightest clue about what evolution actually is and you've made no effort to understand it.

... does this also apply to Doctor Jimbo?

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yes, it is true. (that all mammals are ultimately descended from a single-celled 'common ancestor' organism that would have looked something like an Amoeba).

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Yeah, good point J C, when you put it that way it does sound ridiculous. We're all such fools.

... something like like Biology being the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose ... but your faith prevents you from actually believing this.;)

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

There's no point, you'd be as well debating quantum mechanics with a washing machine.

I lolled. I probably shouldn't but I did. I'm stealing this comparison for future uses.

Ziphius wrote: »

Something that looks like an amoeba =/= an amoeba.

... if it looks like a duck ... walks like a duck and quacks like a duck ... its effectively a duck.

Ditto with an Amoeba!!!:D

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

What about a crocoduck?

SNAP!

Jernal wrote: »

Now we know how the crocoduck was conceived.

... as it doesn't exist it was never conceived.

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Screw it, I'm not going out tonight anyway, might as well open up this can of worms. Why is god an exception? You can't just explain everything you see as impossible off by saying 'ah but god can do it'.

If its impossible by all known means ... and it is, in the case of life ... then only a Being of omnipotent and omniscient capacity could do it.

Whether you call that Being, God, depends on whether you're an Atheist ... or not, I guess.:)

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

I find it genuinely difficult to believe that anyone who thinks about a statement like this for more than 5 seconds can fail to see the obvious logical holes.

... and ... where are the logical holes?

obplayer wrote: »

So because you don't understand how life can come about spontaneously, and there are still gaps in the understanding of how it could have happened, it must have been this being you postulate? Don't you realise that this is the same argument that ascribed thunderbolts to Thor or Zeus? That because we don't understand something now we can never understand it so it must be a 'transcendent being'? This is the logic of the nursery.

Its outside of operative science (but it is within the competence of forensic science) ... as are all 'origins' explanations.

We can compare and contrast the various 'origins' explanations ... but there are basically two general theories ... that life originated via an omnipotent omniscient Being ... or via deterministic processes unknown.

Neither option is very satisfactory, if somebody wants to be certain of what happened ... or how it occurred.
... and it is quite legitimate for Humanity to pursue research into both ideas.

Unfortunately, some Christians (who probably felt their faith in God under threat from the discoveries of science) tried to suppress research and the fruits of research into Evolution/Abiogenesis during the early part of the 20th Century (the Scopes Trial being an example) ... and now similar attempts at suppressing research and the fruits of research into Creation/ID is being carried out in the early part of the 21st century ... probably (and ironically) because of the threat that modern scientific discoveries represent to a belief in a spontaneous/naturalistic explanation for life.

obplayer wrote: »

The point is that everything was once outside of science, from thunderbolts to disease, and that these were ascribed to some god or other. I hope that you don't believe thunderbolts are from god, or disease either, although for the latter how could you? You are after all a qualified microbiologist. Gods were once used as the explanation for everything, now for very little. Why do you assume that that very little will not shrink further? Why do you have to always turn to a father figure in the sky?

I think it's somewhat of an over-simplification to say that disease and thunderbolts were ascribed exclusively to God when there always was an awareness that these were caused by natural forces. I'm not denying that some people ascribed these phenomena to God ... and indeed some people continue to do so.
However, the point I would like to make, is that within science and philosophy it has always been recognised that disease and thunderbolts ... had natural (as distinct from supernatural) explanations.
... and the origins of life have always been accepted as having a potential supernatural origin.