The creator did it.

[Rapture Era]

Not so much speculation as you may think. More contemporary research has demonstrated that the environment at ocean ridge spreading zones of continental drift was the same as it is today and this environment is one of the most likely environments for the earliest life forms and early evolution. The current earliest simple microbe fossils are found rocks from these formations. Another potential environment for the formation of life and early evolution is the host springs, which are similar to the environment of hot springs today.

What do you mean by evolution? Exactly. Walk me through your thinking. What does it take for a life form to come into existence reproduce and survive?

 

[exchemist]

What is the evidence of the early earth environment? No one was there so its just speculation. Miller-Urey tried it in the early 50's. Then 10 years later they really thought they had the atmosphere right and their experiment was a flop. What studies from other planets have convincingly told us what our atmosphere was like? The only one that was here at that time was the creator himself and you have information to discredit him? And I just got done telling you that the evidence of Gods creation is all around you, but you do not want to believe this overwhelming evidence. You only have two choices, either you believe that an all powerful and immensely intelligent being, namely the biblical God created exactly the way he said he did or you don't! I guess you don't, so, good luck with speculation, hypothesizes and theories!

This is rather absurd. If you maintain everything that is not directly observed is no more than "speculation", then you dismiss almost the whole of science, not to mention history and a good deal else besides. Do you think molecules are real, or do you think they are just speculation?

I am afraid your whole approach to this issue shows you do not understand what science does. What it does is make predictive models, of aspects of the physical world, to account for observations. Nobody has seen the birth of a star, but that does not stop astrophysicists from modelling the process and then looking for examples at various stages of the modelled process, to see if its predictions are correct or not.

It is just the same with the study of the origin of life (abiogenesis). We look at the biochemistry of modern life and at the fossil record and from that we have built a model for the tree of life, which proposes that life started from single celled organisms. We have, from the rocks laid down at various eras, some evidence of what conditions were like on the early Earth - notably when free oxygen first appeared, which according to the model would have been due to the start of photosynthesis. Since the fossils tell us life started earlier than that, we are looking for life that does not depend on oxygen for respiration. There are several kinds of life today which are like that. So we study them to get clues. And so on.

It is important to note that in science we do not demand an instant answer to every unsolved problem. We have to have the discipline of not jumping to conclusions. So it is no argument at all that, just because we don't yet have a model for the origin of life, therefore we should all agree it was a supernatural miracle..... job done! That is just not a scientific way of thinking about the problem.

 

[ecco]

Has anyone addressed the question of where the information came from?

Has anyone addressed the question of why water molecules all have the same "shape"? That's a much more fundamental question.

I presume this question is rhetorical.

If not then it is a question for one of us chemists on the forum, I suppose......not sure I want to get into covalent bonding, hybridisation and lone pairs here, though.

I was just contemplating the impossibility of explaining where information comes from to someone who does not understand basic chemistry.

 

[exchemist]

Haaahaaa! good one! Yes, entropy, it's lack of order or predictability; gradual decline into disorder is the nail in the coffin for those who like to think things progress upward and keep getting better!

The concepts of "better" or "progress" are teleological and thus outside a scientific perspective. As such they are not appropriate when thermodynamic concepts are being discussed.

However the requirement for overall entropy increase does not preclude the appearance of ordered structures. Any 6th form physical science student knows this.

So yes, hahaha, indeed!

 

[ecco]

Ummm, genetic information is not a metaphor, its a fact. The question is, where did it come from to produce the vast array of numerous life forms? It seems that an intelligence was involved to bring about this incredible and undisputed information. We can clone a sheep. But if you put a sheep in a pen and tell it to clone itself, I'm sure your demand will not be met, ever! It takes a human mind of great intelligence outside of that life form to do such a thing.

You are essentially making the argument that humans have made for tens of thousands of years:
Questions: Why? What?
Honest answer: Don't know.
Theist answer: GodDidIt.

GodDidIt was not the right answer for why volcanoes erupt or why locusts destroyed crops or why there were severe droughts. Yet some people still turn to GodDidIt when they can't answer Why or What.

This thread is entitled "God did it." If the biblical God is outside of our time and space, how would we ever come to know him? Unless, he chose to tell us. If he didn't choose to tell us, we would be left to try and figure it out on our own. Following ever wind of doctrine not knowing irrefutably what the truth is concerning our origins, our purpose or our destiny. Not only did he choose to tell us these things, he said that we can know of his power and creative attributes by the things that are made.

GodDidIt was not the right answer for why volcanoes erupt or why locusts destroyed crops or why there were severe droughts. Yet some people still turn to GodDidIt when they can't answer Why or What.

Besides the Genesis account (which is how he chose to tell us) He also tells us that "Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." So, it's not so hard to consider that an all powerful and immeasurably intelligent being was able to create all life on this planet and place it in a perfect position in our solar system to be able to sustain life as we know it. Is this reasonable?

No, it is not reasonable to believe stories that say they are truth because they say they are truth.

 

[exchemist]

I was just contemplating the impossibility of explaining where information comes from to someone who does not understand basic chemistry.

The deeper problem is not so much people who do not understand these things, but those who positively avoid learning, for religious reasons.

I sometimes think that "Ignorance is strength" could be the creationist's motto.

 

[ecco]

The Baha'i Faith, and I do not claim everything needs a cause and a beginning. This is an awkward claim among many Christians.

God and our physical existence is eternal and timeless as is the Quantum World beyond our universe and all possible universes.

Therefore, 'not everything must have a beginning' in the view of the Baha'i Faith.

Your answer is the same as that of all religions when trying to address where their god(s) come from. The answer is pretty much the same from all religions: Somehow an all knowing, all powerful entity has always existed.

Which is why I stated in post #80...

That's the same old cop-out non-answer that all religious people give.

Everything needs a cause and a beginning except our god.
The only good response to that is "Uncastrated Adult Male Bovine Feces".

 

[ecco]

What is the evidence of the early earth environment? No one was there so its just speculation.

How do we know that on the fourth day God made two great lights and set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth? No one was there so its just speculation.

 

[shunyadragon]

Your answer is the same as that of all religions when trying to address where their god(s) come from. The answer is pretty much the same from all religions: Somehow an all knowing, all powerful entity has always existed.

Which is why I stated in post #80...

Not the same as described.

 

[shunyadragon]

What do you mean by evolution? Exactly. Walk me through your thinking. What does it take for a life form to come into existence reproduce and survive?

What does it take? The right environment and chemistry, and science has documented that several possibilities existed at the time the first life forms appear in the fossil record. I assume here you are referring to abiogenesis, the beginning of life. One important criteria is an energy source that provides the first life forms with energy. The heat from the hot springs and the spreading ocean ridge zones from continental drift provide that.

 

[Rapture Era]

This is rather absurd. If you maintain everything that is not directly observed is no more than "speculation", then you dismiss almost the whole of science, not to mention history and a good deal else besides. Do you think molecules are real, or do you think they are just speculation?

I am afraid your whole approach to this issue shows you do not understand what science does. What it does is make predictive models, of aspects of the physical world, to account for observations. Nobody has seen the birth of a star, but that does not stop astrophysicists from modelling the process and then looking for examples at various stages of the modelled process, to see if its predictions are correct or not.

It is just the same with the study of the origin of life (abiogenesis). We look at the biochemistry of modern life and at the fossil record and from that we have built a model for the tree of life, which proposes that life started from single celled organisms. We have, from the rocks laid down at various eras, some evidence of what conditions were like on the early Earth - notably when free oxygen first appeared, which according to the model would have been due to the start of photosynthesis. Since the fossils tell us life started earlier than that, we are looking for life that does not depend on oxygen for respiration. There are several kinds of life today which are like that. So we study them to get clues. And so on.

It is important to note that in science we do not demand an instant answer to every unsolved problem. We have to have the discipline of not jumping to conclusions. So it is no argument at all that, just because we don't yet have a model for the origin of life, therefore we should all agree it was a supernatural miracle..... job done! That is just not a scientific way of thinking about the problem.

Thank you for your explanation and response. Science does not understand supernatural creation, it only studies it. In order for people to come to conclusions about the model of the Darwinian tree of life, you must have a starting point. Again, we know today that all living things have DNA and a genetic code with vital information or programming to tell the cell what to do. We also know that the cell cannot gain information and therefore cannot develop into something else. My original question was, if this is so, and it is, where did the information come from? You cant have a partial organism survive. You cant have a partial organism reproduce because it doesn't have the capability to do so and so it dies. It must be complete. Several years ago, a baby was born with hardly any brain mass. It was amazing that it was born alive but died shortly after delivery. How on earth do people get caught up in this nonsense of abiogenesis evolution? You can make all the models you like of what you think might have happened (speculation) and how life might have started under the constraints of the limited knowledge available, but if your presupposition is Darwinian Tree of Life Evolution, you have to make the science fit and it doesn't. Darwin had no clue about DNA and genetics in his day. He only observed what he could see. He barely believed his own theory or hypothesis, and if he knew what we know today, would completely dismiss it! So when you say "We have to have the discipline of not jumping to conclusions. So it is no argument at all that, just because we don't yet have a model for the origin of life, therefore we should all agree it was a supernatural miracle..... job done! That is just not a scientific way of thinking about the problem." The funny thing is, the more we learn through science and technology, the further way abiogenesis and macro evolution slides into the abyss of impossibility. You really only have only two options here, supernatural creation, or evolution. You have accepted the model of life being that of Darwinian evolution and it has not ever been substantiated, EVER. Why is it still being taught in schools? If something never happened, you are going to have a very hard time proving it did. Abiogenesis is impossible. No one has ever observed it and the insane amount of time required in the hypothesis along with the death blow of entropy speaks volumes of it's demise. You can keep trying though.

 

[Rapture Era]

How do we know that on the fourth day God made two great lights and set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth? No one was there so its just speculation.

Well, first of all, I see you like to use scripture to make your point, so lets look at this for a moment. When you state "no one was there" you mean humans. Yes you are correct, but there were three persons that were there. If you are going to cherry pick scripture there is no sense in going any further. But I will leave you with this to contemplate on as it is relevant to our discussion. There is no evolution here because remember, Darwinian macro evolution is impossible. These are the words of the creator telling you how life started and continues to this day. The personal testimony of those who were with the incarnate God, Jesus Christ. Again, you have two choices, either accept it or reject the message, either way, you are making the choice, you cant blame anyone else for your decision or say "I didnt know" because now you know.
1 John 1
Introduction
1 We proclaim to you the one who existed from the beginning, whom we have heard and seen. We saw him with our own eyes and touched him with our own hands. He is the Word of life. 2 This one who is life itself was revealed to us, and we have seen him. And now we testify and proclaim to you that he is the one who is eternal life. He was with the Father, and then he was revealed to us. 3 We proclaim to you what we ourselves have actually seen and heard so that you may have fellowship with us. And our fellowship is with the Father and with his Son, Jesus Christ. 4 We are writing these things so that you may fully share our joy.
Living in the Light
5 This is the message we heard from Jesus and now declare to you: God is light, and there is no darkness in him at all. 6 So we are lying if we say we have fellowship with God but go on living in spiritual darkness; we are not practicing the truth. 7 But if we are living in the light, as God is in the light, then we have fellowship with each other, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, cleanses us from all sin.
8 If we claim we have no sin, we are only fooling ourselves and not living in the truth. 9 But if we confess our sins to him, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all wickedness. 10 If we claim we have not sinned, we are calling God a liar and showing that his word has no place in our hearts.
John 1
Prologue: Christ, the Eternal Word
1 In the beginning the Word already existed.
The Word was with God,
and the Word was God.
2 He existed in the beginning with God.
3 God created everything through him,
and nothing was created except through him.
4 The Word gave life to everything that was created,
and his life brought light to everyone.
5 The light shines in the darkness,
and the darkness can never extinguish it.

 

[Rapture Era]

What does it take? The right environment and chemistry, and science has documented that several possibilities existed at the time the first life forms appear in the fossil record. I assume here you are referring to abiogenesis, the beginning of life. One important criteria is an energy source that provides the first life forms with energy. The heat from the hot springs and the spreading ocean ridge zones from continental drift provide that.

Right, but have you thought this through to it's logical conclusion? Yes, science has documented that several possibilities existed at the time the first life forms appear in the fossil record but none of them have any substance because they are looking and postulating from the wrong presupposition. This is why for over 150 years the whole abiogenesis, Darwinian evolution has gone nowhere. Because it never happened. You are giving generalizations when you say "One important criteria is an energy source that provides the first life forms with energy. The heat from the hot springs and the spreading ocean ridge zones from continental drift provide that." My question was, have you thought about how it is possible for abiogenesis in the first place. Second, with what science KNOWS about the genetic code in DNA, abiogenesis is impossible. So , I'm confused why you would still hold to the thinking that life was started by chemical processes. Time is not on the side of this kind of thinking, it's actually it's enemy! The Miller-Urey experiment with very intelligent men of the early 50's tried to do what you mentioned above. It was proven this kind of thinking doesnt work, a few amino acids do not create anything. So what did that that complicated lab experiment have to say about the possibility of nature doing it by accident without the help of man? Outdoors, it could NOT be done without his help or with it. So when is it reasonable to give up on an impossibility? Each person will have to decide for themselves I suppose.

 

[Rapture Era]

The concepts of "better" or "progress" are teleological and thus outside a scientific perspective. As such they are not appropriate when thermodynamic concepts are being discussed.

However the requirement for overall entropy increase does not preclude the appearance of ordered structures. Any 6th form physical science student knows this.

So yes, hahaha, indeed!

This is why huge amounts of time are the ordered structures enemy!

 

[exchemist]

This is why huge amounts of time are the ordered structures enemy!

True enough. This explains ageing and death - and thus one reason why reproduction is important to living organisms. The order is rebuilt anew in every organism as it grows, while larger amounts of disorder are created by it in the process, due to its metabolism.

What people forget is that the amount of order in an egg or sperm cell is tiny - it is only one cell. As an organism grows, the cells multiply and the amount of order multiplies millions of times over.

And yet, no creationist ever objects that it is impossible for an organism to grow!

 

[Rapture Era]

It is just the same with the study of the origin of life (abiogenesis). We look at the biochemistry of modern life and at the fossil record and from that we have built a model for the tree of life, which proposes that life started from single celled organisms.

I get everything you are saying, but as your quote states, where did the information for single celled organisms originate? There have been over 150 years of research and science predictions and models which have turned up nothing but, might have, could have, we think, we dont really know but some day we may have the answer. This is not demanding immediate answers, its a cumulative question that has spanned decades with no conclusive answers but speculation. Hypothesizes and theories abound but no definitive answers. The truth of what science is looking for is right in front of its face but there are those in academia who's funding and jobs would be threatened if they veer from the naturalistic evolution view of millions or billions of years! Plane and simple. Science is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. Science has proved beyond a doubt that living organisms only come from whole and complete living organisms. The reproduction of living things is impossible if it does not have the full ability to do so. Guess what? The Genesis account says just that! But you don't want to accept the truth which makes obvious sense so you continue to search for an impossible alternative. Again, you cant prove something that never happened no matter how long or how hard you try. Science has and will continue to bow it's knee to the scripture of the biblical and living God! It depends on how bloody you want your bat to get before you finally realize that beating this dead horse of evolution is a complete waste of time. But you keep swinging and hitting because by golly I'm not going to bend my knee to the truth!

 

[exchemist]

I get everything you are saying, but as your quote states, where did the information for single celled organisms originate? There have been over 150 years of research and science predictions and models which have turned up nothing but, might have, could have, we think, we dont really know but some day we may have the answer. This is not demanding immediate answers, its a cumulative question that has spanned decades with no conclusive answers but speculation. Hypothesizes and theories abound but no definitive answers. The truth of what science is looking for is right in front of its face but there are those in academia who's funding and jobs would be threatened if they veer from the naturalistic evolution view of millions or billions of years! Plane and simple. Science is the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment. Science has proved beyond a doubt that living organisms only come from whole and complete living organisms. The reproduction of living things is impossible if it does not have the full ability to do so. Guess what? The Genesis account says just that! But you don't want to accept the truth which makes obvious sense so you continue to search for an impossible alternative. Again, you cant prove something that never happened no matter how long or how hard you try. Science has and will continue to bow it's knee to the scripture of the biblical and living God! It depends on how bloody you want your bat to get before you finally realize that beating this dead horse of evolution is a complete waste of time. But you keep swinging and hitting because by golly I'm not going to bend my knee to the truth!

Drunk?

 

[exchemist]

Of course not! Again and again, where did the information or programming for the cells to build four chambered hearts and lungs and all the internal organs and brain and all of what we know of the human body not to mention all other forms of life and their body structures to reproduce and survive only speaks of an immense intelligence and all powerful God that created all life and this planet and the universe just the way he said he did! Again, if he chose not to tell us, we would be flying around like a leaf in the wind of every doctrine and arm chair philosopher wondering what the real truth is. God did choose to tell us how we came to be, what our purpose is and what our destiny is. We have the freedom of choosing our eternal destiny. He has provided through the death and perfect sacrifice of his only son Jesus for us to choose our eternal place. Either heaven or Hell. Both are real places. Which one would you want to spend all of eternity? It's not a very hard decision to make. Listen, once you die (and no one knows when the will happen) your decision while you are still alive is going to adversely affect your eternal existence. People get up every day going about their daily existence not expecting that this day will be their last day on earth but it happens. People are killed in all sorts of ways and once that happens, that's it, no second chances. Eternity is a long time! Because we are not guaranteed tomorrow, wouldn't you want to be absolutely sure that if you died, you would KNOW where you would want to spend your eternity?
It's a compelling thought!

You MUST be drunk. At any rate, there's nothing to respond to here.

'night.

 

[Rapture Era]

You MUST be drunk. At any rate, there's nothing to respond to here.

'night.

No, I'm not drunk, and there is everything to respond to. I'm assuming you choose not to do so for whatever reason and that is your choice. But now that you know the truth, you have no excuse to say I didn't know. I would hope that you are open enough to follow the truth no matter where it leads.
By the way, in Romans 1:19-21 God says this:
…19"For what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood from His workmanship, so that men are without excuse. 21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified Him as God nor gave thanks to Him, but they became futile in their thinking and darkened in their foolish hearts....
I implore you to rethink your stance in private. Forget about this forum, and anyone who is watching. In private, ask God to reveal the truth to you . Everyone here can do the same thing. If you are really interested in knowing the truth. If not, just let your life play out and accept what you have chosen and the consequences that go along with it. But understand this, eternity never ends! Your life here on earth is the only chance you get. Be very careful what you chose!

 

[Bear Wild]

Of course not! Again and again, where did the information or programming for the cells to build four chambered hearts and lungs and all the internal organs and brain and all of what we know of the human body not to mention all other forms of life and their body structures to reproduce and survive only speaks of an immense intelligence and all powerful God that created all life and this planet and the universe just the way he said he did! Again, if he chose not to tell us, we would be flying around like a leaf in the wind of every doctrine and arm chair philosopher wondering what the real truth is. God did choose to tell us how we came to be, what our purpose is and what our destiny is. We have the freedom of choosing our eternal destiny? Yes, He has provided through the death and perfect sacrifice of his only son Jesus for us to choose our eternal place. Either heaven or Hell. Both are real places. Which one would you want to spend all of eternity? It's not a very hard decision to make. Listen, once you die (and no one knows when the will happen) your decision while you are still alive is going to adversely affect your eternal existence. People get up every day going about their daily existence not expecting that this day will be their last day on earth but it happens. People are killed in all sorts of ways and once that happens, that's it, no second chances. Eternity is a long time! Because we are not guaranteed tomorrow, wouldn't you want to be absolutely sure that if you died, you would KNOW where you would want to spend your eternity?
It's a compelling thought!

Heaven and hell are mythological places with no more validity then the Annwn or Tir Na Nog. They are all equally real. What you clearly do not understand is the create force of nature. If you have any doubt just look outside on a clear night and gaze at our own galaxy. The evidence for natural forces that created live and the process of evolution are amazing without the need of a mythical creator. I have heard the fear tactics of some Christians so many times and I know it makes them feel good to say them so that they can feel better but they are and will remain stories. We die so others can live. We pass on our genetics in hopes that it will give our offspring the ability to survive and have children. Our amazing universe is a creative force without the need of being to help it.