in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Cofty, " don't you think you should thoroughly investigate the evidence before you declare something impossible?
Well to be fair Cofty, you sound like a bully who beats kids up at school. How can I or even you thoroughly investigate all the evidence on the subject "origin of life?" Are you even slightly aware of the term " thoroughly" Apparently so, therefore please clarify how you have thoroughly investigated this subject to declare opposing views impossible?
of providing high quality food?.
personally i prefer the small restaurants with a owner who cooks the food.
often the food is equally imaginative and just as tasty as the more expensive restaurant.
of providing high quality food?
Personally I prefer the small restaurants with a owner who cooks the food. Often the food is equally imaginative and just as tasty as the more expensive restaurant. Sorry for the gripe, but yesterday evening I had to take out a second mortgage at an expensive restaurant, only to leave the gristle on the side of my plate.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
So Cofty by your answers to my questions, are you not saying that our modern understanding about the origin of life should be labeled" Science"? If so then can you understand the problem for many is that then, science has ripped apart societies past understandings and perceived reality of the " origin of life" and " God"?
I think this is why so many of your posts create such controversy, science wipes the floor with so many God arguments. Now I am not saying your answers are often to blant and direct, but I am saying if the universe and origin of life has been created by God, then in my opinion believers should come up with some different questions. This would lead to some constructive but less personal debates.
Only my opinion, but the jump from a beliver to agnostic, or athiest is a lot of change to a personality, and myself included not easy to address on an Internet forum. But I do feel it important to say the changing landscape in my worldview can only come by people speaking their truth. As for the O.P and the origin of life. I think on accuracy states I would agree the earth is over 3 billions years old, and was not created by God. Personally I also with my limited research believe direct evidence for the origin of life impossible.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Well having read the thread, and as Viv pointed out a great debate is helped by the right questions being asked. So whilst my questions are maybe the wrong questions for a great debate,for a poster at my level:-
a) would most agree that the origin of life began over 3 billion years ago?
b) if so then would we agree direct evidence for the origin of life impossible?
C) However according to the O.P I would be incorrect in assuming the first cause of life had to be living. Not sure I fully understood the explanation though.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Thanks Viv.
Viviane :-" In science, a theory is the current best explanation supported by a body of evidence, experiment observation and it is falsiable"
So to clarify are you saying that when science proposes a theory, then one should try ones best to disprove it?
Viviane " All questions are not equal. Questions based on misunderstanding.....
Has history not taught as that most scientific theories are not quite right? If so then they are based on misunderstanding
Vivianne:- "and dishonesty, particularly when the questioner has been corrected multiple times and still persists in the question"
Noted. However isn't that an assumption to assume a poster is being dishonest even if they have been corrected many times and still persist in the question. I am not saying it's an incorrect assumption, but I am sure many current scientific theories are a result of a scientist who refused to accept being corrected many times and persisted in his theory.
p.s I am confused how on content Viviane got a dislike on her previous reply to mine.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
My name is the rebel, I harbor no illusions of being a poster of more than average intelligence and intellect. I would therefore appreciate constructive replys to these thoughts my mind has raised having read the thread, which are:-
A) Am I correct in thinking science at present can understand very little about consciousness? If so does that have any effect on how science views "The Origin of life?"
B) Am I correct in thinking the " origin of life" can still only be theorized and observed but when it comes to complete understanding even scientists are still only small children?
...
It would be remiss of me not to reply Viviane and her earlier question? "what good points do I feel Slim has made?" Well the only answer I can give, is that in the search for answers we need the questions. And Slims questions are always new to me.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Cofty I think I will hush :-) Besides I am going to the flicks tonight, which I am sure is less entertaining than this thread, and being accompanied with a family who also require popcorn and coke rather expensive:-(
Hope the thread comes to a positive conclusion!
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Viviane " No thanks ....I don't need to deal with anymore childish drama"
The Rebel:- Oh the irony. Viv please examine your post history, each thread you attach yourself to becomes "childish drama"
Further irony, many posts ago Cofty said he would not respond to anymore of Slims comments. Well then my suggestion Cofty, is that you start a new thread with the same interesting "O.P" but follow your convictions ,and don't comment on Slims posts.
It's possible ex-witnesses are further forward than awake magazine science, and can be trusted to compare and contrast your O.Ps and alternative viewpoints without the need of ugly confrontations.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Viviane " wait you think that being called out for not being able to come up with a single good point SBF AFTER....... ...."
The Rebel, Viviane, I know you miss me, so please understand there is not a 10 minute rule to reply to your posts. My opinion and answers will be more valued by "YOU" if you give me time, not only to come up with answers, but time to think how you will take those words, and misconstrue them to your advantage.
in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.
there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.
Nicolaou:-
Nicolaou, : The fact that you were unable to come up with a single point SBF has made is rather telling. Don't you think?
The Rebel:- Nicolaou, then please come up with a single point that Cofy and Vivianne have made that fits the same criteria. Rather telling. Don't you think?
