re: Challenge for the enlightened members of the OT

quote:

---

Evolution does not address how the first self replicating organisms arose on Earth...

---

I'm not saying it was aliens... but... prove me wrong.

quote:

---

Well...that's simply false. I'd go through the trouble of explaining it, but I'm going to save you the trouble of heading over to some page like creation.org to copy and paste their argument for the differences between their own terms "micro" and "macro" evolution. I will copy and paste this for you from there though, and feel free to defend this as an intellectual position that enables one to have a discussion with another person.

---

Why would I feel the need to defend statements I didn't make, and may not even believe? What is that, a ready made strawman?


You are blowing by my question, because it is inconvenient. We are surrounded by life. How was the first living thing created? You have the vocabulary. Give me the reader's digest version.

quote:

---

And the answer to THAT question is, we do not know.

---

Thank you.

Some have faith that it happened one way, some have faith that it happened another. Faith.

quote:

---

Some have faith that it happened one way, some have faith that it happened another. Faith.

---

No, I believe the term you are looking for is theory.

A theory is a much different concept than faith.

quote:

---

Why would I feel the need to defend statements I didn't make, and may not even believe? What is that, a ready made strawman?

---

No...just saving time as I've had these arguments on here more times than I care to remember. If you disagree with those statements, then fine...kudos, because they are ridiculous for anyone interested in having a discussion from which one's own beliefs have a real possibility of changing. If, however, you agree with them, please have the courtesy to let us know so that I can move on, because I have no interest in having a discussion with someone who, by definition, is unwilling to accept a fact if it goes against what they already held dear.

quote:

---

You are blowing by my question, because it is inconvenient.

---

I'm blowing by your question because I'm tired of answering it on here as if it's still a valid discussion. It isn't. Literally NO ONE but religious ideologues are suggesting that evolution did not/does not occur. Literally the only counter to it is special creation, for which there is ZERO evidence, and in absolutely no way can be tested for...AND which can easily be dis-proven on thousands of fronts. That is, unless you are simply going to shake your head and state "nuh uh" any time someone shows you evidence that disproves one of your faith based beliefs.

quote:

---

We are surrounded by life. How was the first living thing created?

---

We. Don't. Know.

Why is that not an answer for you guys? There is no shame in admitting that there are things which we simply do not know yet, and frankly MAY NEVER know. But knot knowing a fundamental things DOES NOT in ANY WAY leave open the equal possibility that "God" fills in that gap. And the reason ought to be obvious...and that's that you most first prove the existence of god, right?

quote:

---

You have the vocabulary. Give me the reader's digest version.

---

In a nutshell, the hypothesis is something along the lines of this:

quote:

---

Abiogenesis is the process by which life arises naturally from non-living matter. Scientists speculate that life may have arisen as a result of random chemical processes happening to produce self-replicating molecules. One of the popular current hypotheses involves chemical reactivity around hydrothermal vents.[1][2] This hypothesis has yet to be empirically proven although the current evidence is generally supportive of it.

---

Notice how nothing there states anything with any certainty. It's a working hypothesis, based on the fact that, until we know differently, a naturalistic origin is the most likely place to look.

quote:

---

The big difference I see is that I readily admit that my beliefs are based on my faith in God, while folks on you side refuse to acknowledge that their system is every bit as much faith-based. At least 2 of you have admitted as much. You have no idea how life started, but unless given proof, you refuse to believe God created life. Yet you require no such proof to believe that it wasn't God, but something else, because we are surrounded by life.

---

This makes no sense whatsoever.

We are saying "We don't know."

You are saying "I do know, God."

Ok, prove it. Provide any testable, falsifiable evidence whatsoever. Any.

We will wait.

Forever.

quote:

---

Are you really trying to equate faith-based belief systems with scientific theory?

---

Yes, that's part of the game. Straight out of the AnswersInGenesis playbook.

quote:

---

Materialism relies on the theory of evolution, which requires it's own faith. Evolution is replete with supposition, assumption, unsupported conclusions, falsehoods, and faith.

Obviously, the universe exists. I find it interesting that you demand proof of a religious explanation as to how it exists, but employ a faith based scientific explanation.

---

Oh my goodness