On Evolution & Creation

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm speaking about current news events
Technology is a two-edged sword

What isn't?

I disagree this is a bad side of technology. It's a bad side of humans.
You can poison yourself drinking too much water also.

World NEWS is grim (aka wars) with No solution.
Sure, the powers in charge can be saying, " Peace and Security...." but those rosy-sounding words can fool people leading them down that old primrose path Not to safety, but to great tribulation

So, same old story as ever, including back when they were fighting with sticks and stones.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

No life has been created from inanimate objects.

You have successfully repeated what he actually said and ignored what he also said.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Yep, but to evolve life has to be given. How did life emerge? If you believe in abiogenesis, how did abiogenesis take place?

Abiogenesis factually happened. This not a question of "belief" if it occurred.
Once there was no life and then there was. So factually, it originated in some way ending up with life where there was no life before: Abiogenesis.

"how" is a different question and the answer is that scientists are working on it.
Everything points to some kind of complex chemistry.
There is nothing pointing to anything else.

 

[Audie]

Abiogenesis factually happened. This not a question of "belief" if it occurred.
Once there was no life and then there was. So factually, it originated in some way ending up with life where there was no life before: Abiogenesis.

"how" is a different question and the answer is that scientists are working on it.
Everything points to some kind of complex chemistry.
There is nothing pointing to anything else.

Even shorter:
evolution is real
creation is imaginary

 

[viole]

The Theory of Evolution begins at the first replicators. However, there is no direct or fossil evidence for this. Dinosaurs are one thing. This starting point is a creation by man, based on genetic centric thinking, which may not be the best assumption. The DNA is the hard drive and not the processor.

If you started with replicators, for the sake of argument, the question becomes, where does all the needed materials and logistics to replicate come from, so they can replicate? A replicator by itself does not replicate. It needs logistical support; raw materials and enzyme complexes. In the lab, humans can provide this. But where did this support come from, before life and only naked replicators?

The replicators theory has the first replicators all set up for success, which make no sense, unless the protein had previously reach a level of sophistication to provide the logistics.

For the created replicator theory to work, we will need essentially a basic cell, with all the logistics to perform all the needed process steps. That is one recipe for success. When modern DNA is duplicated, and is packed into condensed chromosomes, the DNA is off line. The rest of the cell does the work. It makes more sense that proteins and enzymes need to evolve, even before replicators, or the replicator will not be able to do anything; too many bottlenecks. They would need to wait and would break down waiting.

It makes more sense for the protein to evolve first, so we have a way to provide the key logistics to push the replicators over the top. Protein are simply polymers of amino acids, which is simple and straight forward. RNA and RNA polymerization is more complex; multi-group monomers; phosphate, sugar and nucleic acids, than the simple protein monomers. Protein has an edge with amino acid easy to make with simple materials. The Miller experiments were able to make more amino acids types than natures uses. It can be done in both oxidizing and reduced environments.

The wild card is water. Protein create surface tension in water, so water will process these raw protein, the same way; minimizing the surface tension in the water. This is a good way for water to grade protein by residual surface tension. This then will encourage higher and lower tension packed protein, to come together to lower the composite surface tension. This grading and combining is not random but has sweet spots. While water packing protein, lowers entropy and adds an entropic potential; catalytic. Water is a major processor, getting protein ready, so they can also process.

One problem with protein polymerization is water is a product of amino acid polymerization. When done in water, protein tends to back add water and reverse the protein. However, when water packs protein, this offers a way to shield the oily core from the water reversal. I can see packed protein reversing, but only so far; become smaller oily membrane protein.

The Miller experiments also produce resinous solids, too complex to analyze in the 1950's. This suggests the precursors of what we call fossil fuels, may have been around before life, and was part of the abiogenesis mixture; oils and membrane. Polymerizing amino acids in oil has the advantage of making water reversal harder, and the water produced will separate out of the oil and sink.

Is that a challenge to abiogenesis or evolution?

In my experience, Flinstonians tend to easily confuse the two, for some reason.

ciao

- viole

 

[Audie]

Is that a challenge to abiogenesis or evolution?

In my experience, Flinstonians tend to easily confuse the two, for some reason.

ciao

- viole

But few write a treatise to illustrate their confusion.

 

[viole]

But few write a treatise to illustrate their confusion.

Usually, treatises, or incredible long posts, trying to overwhelm the reader, is like using lots of deodorants trying to disable the senses. Especially the olfactive one. .

Ciao

- viole

 

[Hooded_Crow]

What animal apologizes for taking the food of another ___________
Animal go by instinct that is why some, not all, mate for life

Forms of moral behaviour, such as altruism, empathy, care for others other than one's own kin (or even species, in some cases) are observed in non-human animals. Do a search. You'll find many examples. If evolution is a continuum, it stands to reason that moral behaviour would be found in many social species. It's not a uniquely human trait.

If human evolution is reality then why is there moral degression instead of evolvement in morality

Just because these behaviours exist doesn't mean that everyone abides by them. People do good things. People do bad things.

 

[YoursTrue]

Well, Enoch was one of the legendary characters who, says Genesis, existed before Noah's flood, so it's not as if we're talking history here.

Since you believe that is the case, anything you say about that cannot be based on what you believe or think is truth. Now therefore -- (I'll let you conclude that right now)

 

[YoursTrue]

Forms of moral behaviour, such as altruism, empathy, care for others other than one's own kin (or even species, in some cases) are observed in non-human animals. Do a search. You'll find many examples. If evolution is a continuum, it stands to reason that moral behaviour would be found in many social species. It's not a uniquely human trait.


Just because these behaviours exist doesn't mean that everyone abides by them. People do good things. People do bad things.

That is true perhaps regarding certain creatures about protecting one another perhaps, but humans, imo, are a totally different situation.

 

[Tiberius]

That is true perhaps regarding certain creatures about protecting one another perhaps, but humans, imo, are a totally different situation.

Why?

Can you provide any evidence to show that evolution of social behaviours does not occur with Humans?

 

[blü 2]

Since you believe that is the case, anything you say about that cannot be based on what you believe or think is truth. Now therefore -- (I'll let you conclude that right now)

You really think there was a literal Garden of Eden? A literal Noah's flood?

I quietly suggest you not apply for a job as a historian.

 

[blü 2]

Why?

Can you provide any evidence to show that evolution of social behaviours does not occur with Humans?

Experiments in social behavior point to its changing as its social setting changes. We're born with some important moral instincts, appropriate for living in cooperative groups ─ dislike of the one who harms, like of fairness and reciprocity, respect for authority, loyalty to the group, a sense of self-worth through self-denial ─ but how to interact socially with family, relatives, friends, the opposite sex, people older or younger, authority figures (teacher, doctor, police), how to behave when dining in company, when in a group, when in a team, the communal observation of pairings, birth, coming of age, death, &c are all learnt behaviors..

As to the evolved behaviors, I gave a brief outline of one the experiments here >Atheists acknowledging historical Jesus' goodness<, should you be interested.