"Intelligent design" creationism basically finished

Cypress said:
Scientists can easily create quarks and electrons in particle accelerators because the quantum relationship between energy and matter is well understood.
Click to expand...
No, they can't.
Cypress said:
A prokaryotic cell is infinitely more complex than a quark.

After eighty years of research, scientists have never spontaneously created cellular life from inert, prebiotic chemicals. Though some promising leads have been discovered.

That's what makes the abiogenesis hypothesis so bloody interesting. Scientists love unresolved questions.
Click to expand...
No science here...move along...move along...
 
Cypress said:
Abiogenesis and the origin of life often triggers both the far right holy rollers and the far left militant atheists.

The holy roller wants to leverage unresolved questions about abiogenesis to claim it's proof of a divine hand in the origin of life.

Militant atheists want to utterly downplay and sweep under the rug that there might be any mystery to the origin of life.


Scientists love nothing more than mysteries and unresolved scientific questions, and they approach abiogenesis as a non-partisan and highly compelling area of research.
Click to expand...

Religion is not science, dude.
 
If life didn't spring from inorganic matter, are sub-atomic particles alive?

It's amazing how people will give things pulled directly from their asses--like Creation, for example--the same credibility or more than that which all may observe or at least recognize as plausible..
 
NiftyNiblick said:
If life didn't spring from inorganic matter, are sub-atomic particles alive?

It's amazing how people will give things pulled directly from their asses--like Creation, for example--the same credibility or more than that which all may observe or at least recognize as plausible..
Click to expand...

Science is all about asking the right questions.

The abiogenesis hypothesis asks what the process was for self organizing and self replicating complex cellular life emerged out of inert prebiotic chemicals.

It is one of the most scientific questions of the century. Just asking the question does not imply a Guy in white robe made it happen, at least to me.
 
Cypress said:
Science is all about asking the right questions.
Click to expand...
Science is not questions.
Cypress said:
The abiogenesis hypothesis
Click to expand...
No such thing. The Theory of Abiogenesis is a nonscientific theory.
Cypress said:
asks what the process was for self organizing and self replicating complex cellular life emerged out of inert prebiotic chemicals.
Click to expand...
It does not ask anything. The Theory of Abiogenesis simply states that life arrived on Earth through a series of random unspecified events. It simply describes this process to explain how life came to Earth.
Cypress said:
It is one of the most scientific questions of the century.
Click to expand...
It is not a question.
Cypress said:
Just asking the question does not imply a Guy in white robe made it happen, at least to me.
Click to expand...
It is not a question.
 
Cypress said:
I don't think something has to be a theory to be taught in a science class. Even just a hypothesis, or even a compelling scientific idea could be discussed.

The qualifying characteristics is they can't invoke the supernatural, and they have to have a mathematical or physical basis and they have to be make predictions, at least in principle.

<snip>
Click to expand...
I ran across something from a well regarded philosopher of science who basically says the same thing I did about it what actually qualifies as a scientific hypothesis:

Testibility is sufficient to qualify a hypothesis as scientific, but not necessary in the short run if a proposed hypothesis is attractive on explanatory grounds and is fertile in stimulating new lines of research which promise testibility and falsifiability in the long run.

-Steven Goldman, Lehigh University
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top