so: If scientist would replicate the beginning of life, starting the fire, giving life a second start, perhaps a different start, would that not prove that it is not unique? There is many way to start a fire, friction, chemical-- but what if we can't?
Origin of Life
would that not prove that it is not unique?
It would prove that life is not "magic".
That is why answers like Vidqun's are so dishonest. All theists assume that there is something special about LIFE - a ghost in the machine that originates with god. If science succeeds it will prove what scientists already know. Life is a physical process not a thing.
Theists believe there is no life without a "lifegiver". Science says all you need is rock, water and carbon dioxide.
Cofty: Science says all you need is rock, water and carbon dioxide.
And that is exactly the reason why I believe what I believe. You can shake, dilute, concentrate, and/or electrocute rock, water, and carbon dioxide. You can do with such a chemical composition whatever you want. You can change the combination and concentrations in any way you want. And whatever you do, you and your fellow evolutionists can carry on doing it for a million years non-stop. But let me assure you, life and its processes will not be kick started in such a way, yes, even if you stand on your head.
Maybe if you made the effort to understand the idea you would be less confident that it can't be done.
It's only a matter of time.
I'm curious to know how you will deal with it when it happens. I suppose we have an answer already - denial.
Cofty in first post:
How do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?
Cofty in later post:
It has nothing at all to do with answering "ultimate questions" How the process of life began is a scientific puzzle not a metaphysical one. That is the point. It's not about whether god exists, it's simply about how the process of life gets started.
Huh? Which is it?
Cofty consistently using insults instead of addressing the argument:
You are a troll. You constantly hijack threads with your tedious po-mo bullshit.
Mars may have life on it. Bacterial life. Images from a satellite above Mars excited people when they showed dark moving patches. If there is liquid on Mars, and it contains bacterial life, how will the Theists explain it away?
I've realised that there's a hard core group of Theists that will always reject evidence. If intelligent space aliens appeared tomorrow and humanity said 'So was it God or evolution?' and the space aliens said 'evolution' then a huge section of humanity would reject them. They're wrong - they don't know for sure. They're demons (which I'm sure would be the JW.org response).
Cofty, let's say scientists will soon be able to replicate a one-celled organism exactly, cell wall, cell membrane. organelles, nucleus, enzymes, catalysts, proteins, etc. But now, how to get things going? Remember, the organism is dead. Even if all the nutrients are present, how to start the different cycles? Glycolysis, the Kreb Cycle, electron transport chain, aerobic and/or anaerobic respiration, etc. You are confident that they are going to do it: "It's only a matter of time." I am not so sure. It's a long shot. So, when I see it, I believe it.
Viidiquin - what do mean what gets it going? Cos matter is constantly in motion anyway - sometimes fast sometimes so slow you can hardly notice.
Ruby, to start off the organism is dead, remember. Now to get the organism to function normally, eating, breathing, replicating, as what one would expect from a living organism.
Vidqun your comment betrays the mistaken idea that a cell is animated by a force called life. It is nothing like that. There are simple precursors of all of those complex systems.
I'minterested in how you would accommodate this within your worldview. Would denial be your only option?