"attempt to produce the natural conditions " That would be intelligent design as we do not know the conditions present.
I have never said an organism can not evolve. We see natural selection within a species to produce variations all the time.
Intelligent design does not replace some...
There is no real difference in spontaneous generation and abiogenesis.
In abiogenesis it just claims you have to get everything in perfect order and then maybe shock it with lighting before the spontaneous life forms.
No- life has never been created from inorganic materials in a lab and only very simple amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment
I have presented that in other discussion you are welcome to read.
This topic was
No- life has never been created from inorganic materials in a lab and only very simple amino acids.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment
Yes the big bang is just one theory. However it is the prevalent theory in science and that theory says physics laws did not exist before the bang.
I said clearly in my posts the laws had to exist or the big bang could not have occurred.
Me in the OP " If no Laws were present there would be no...
That is a religious perception.
God
1.
(in Christianity and other monotheistic religions) the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being.
I posted that definition in my OP and no mention of super natural.
Try again!
Sapiens apparently wasn't able to a
Sapiens apparently wasn't able to answer the question: Sapiens- what is holding the matter in your body together right now?
So I will give a general answer: It is a result of a special force(s) not yet known and the result of a law of conservation of...
Wow- that is quite the theory or imagination you have there!
You say- "Nothing has ever come into existence."
You say- "the laws of physics are also merely properties of energy-mass-space-time quartet) have always existed in some form or the other."
The scientists say:
" Before the Big Bang...
"Laws are descriptions, models of processes that are sufficiently consistent and simple enough to be considered, for all intents, predictable."
You are confusing the man made term "law" which describes a phenomenon observable and testable with the phenomenon itself.
If you think Law of...
Well, we could say everything is just imagination and we are not even having this discussion.
There are theories to that but I do exist as far as my intelligence and senses are capable of interpreting so I have to start from that point.
Thanks for sharing!
"Man did invent the (scientific) laws. I say this because....Others will claim that man invented God."
Well, we have lots of evidence that the laws existed before man and man must also follow those laws.
The laws and our description of the Laws from our limited intelligence are not the same...
Determination and testing of a law does not create a law.
You are trying to say the law is just the perspective of man and obviously that is not correct because we have lots of evidence from before man existed that the laws were in effect.
"What you describe as laws are in fact the observed and tested properties and interactions involving forces and matter."
This puts the cart before the horse. You are claiming matter forms without laws and then laws become a property of matter.
Show me your evidence for that please since it...
You ave added nothing of substance to the discussion and just your usual immature trolling.
You will be ignored on this discussion.
If you want respect- start showing respect!
You have added nothing of substance to the discussion and will be ignored for the rest of this discussion.
If you want respect for your posts- start showing respect!